A mathematical approach to study and forecast racial groups interactions: deterministic modeling and scenario method

Globalization and migratory fluxes are increasing the ethnic and racial diversity within many countries. Therefore, describing social dynamics requires models that are apt to capture multi-groups interactions. Building on the assumption of a relationship between multi-racial dynamics and socioeconomic status (SES), we introduce an aggregate, contextual, and continuous index of SES accounting for measures of income, employment, expected life, and group numerosity. After, taking into account that groups’ SES assumes the form of a logit model, we propose a Lotka–Volterra system to study and forecast the interaction among racial groups. Last, we apply our methodology to describe the racial dynamics in the US society. In particular, we study the kind and the intensity of Asians–Blacks–Natives–Whites interactions in the US between 2002 and 2013. Moreover, we forecast the evolution of groups’ SES and how interracial relations will unfold between 2013 and 2018 and in three alternative stylized scenarios.

     

Is Foreign Technological Advance Harmful in the Melitz Model?

Foreign technological advance unambiguously reduces home welfare in a popular variant of the Melitz (Econometrica 71(6):1695–1725, 2003) model that assumes the presence of a costlessly traded homogeneous (outside) good (Demidova in Int Econ Rev 49(4):1437–1462, 2008). The present paper shows that this result is sensitive to the presence of the outside good and is, in fact, reversed in its absence: foreign technological advance always improves home welfare in the Melitz model without the outside good. Improvement in home welfare occurs via changes in the numbers and prices of domestic and imported varieties. For quantitative analysis of welfare effects, we calibrate an international trade model for the United States and its major trading partners. US is found to gain less from foreign technological improvements than its trading partners from US improvements. In either case, the magnitude of gains is modest.     

Heterogeneous Productivity and the Gains from Trade and FDI

Nontraded goods account for a major share of GDP in most economies, but have not been incorporated in the welfare analysis of monopolistic-competition models with heterogeneous productivity. This paper extends Helpman, Melitz and Yeaple (American Economic Review 94(1):300–316, 2004) to explore welfare effects in the presence of a nontraded good. We derive new analytical results about how the gains from trade and FDI are determined and affected by key parameters in the case of symmetric countries. The model is calibrated to a country group that includes all major developed countries. The gains from openness (trade and FDI) are found to be substantial (between 3.24 and 6.27 per cent of income) even if nontraded goods represent a major part of the economy. Most of these gains are attributed to trade rather than FDI.     

Do channels of financial integration matter for FDI’s impact on growth? Empirical evidence using a panel

This paper adds to the debate on the relationship between foreign direct investment (FDI) and economic growth which suggest that the link between FDI and economic growth is rather the consequence of both FDI and growth responding endogenously to economic integration. We investigate if the impact of FDI on growth is dependent on the channel of integration used to attract FDI. We use four different indexes of economic integration including Trade Openness, Chinn-Ito, and KOF and our newly constructed index of financial integration. We employ these four indexes to investigate the role played by economic integration in linking FDI and growth. We use a panel consisting of 134 developing countries and data spanning the period 1989-2017 estimated using the generalized method of moments (GMM) technique. The results show that FDI is an important determinant of growth. The results also suggest that at least some of the integration variables do matter and work as channels to attract FDI leading to growth. However, after stratifying countries by income level, we also find that integration matters mainly for high income countries. Integration variables for other income groups do not show much significance. These are interesting results and may have important policy implications.