This paper proposes a simple model to study how domestic institutions affect patterns of international capital flows. Inefficient financial system, and poor corporate governance, may be bypassed by two-way capital flows in which domestic savings leave the country in the form of financial capital outflows but domestic investment takes place via inward FDI. While financial globalization always improves the welfare of a developed country with a good financial system, its effect is ambiguous for a developing country with an inefficient financial sector or poor corporate governance. Interestingly, financial and property rights institutions can have opposite effects on capital flows. (JEL D02, E21, F21, F32, G34)

a b s t r a c tDominant theories of trade tend to ignore the role of finance as a source of comparative advantage. On the other hand, the finance literature places financial institutions as a driver of economic growth. This paper unites these two competing schools of thought in a general equilibrium framework. For economies with highquality institutions (defined by the competitiveness of the financial sector, the quality of corporate governance, and the level of property rights protection), finance is passive. On the other hand, for economies with low-quality institutions, the quality of the financial system is an independent source of comparative advantage. Interestingly, the conventional measure of financial development (the size of the financial market relative to GDP) does not adequately capture the underlying quality of financial institutions. In addition, free trade may reduce the aggregate income in South. Financial capital tends to flow from South to North.

This paper proposes a simple model to study the relationship between domestic institutions-financial system, corporate governance, and property rights protection-and patterns of international capital flows. It studies conditions under which financial globalization can be a substitute for reforms of domestic financial system. Inefficient financial system and poor corporate governance in a country may be completely bypassed by two-way capital flows in which domestic savings leave the country in the form of financial capital outflows but domestic investment takes place via inward foreign direct investment. While financial globalization always improves the welfare of a developed country with a good financial system, its effect is ambiguous for a developing country with an inefficient financial sector/poor corporate governance. However, the net effect for a developing country is more likely to be positive, the stronger its property rights protection. This is consistent with the observation that developed countries are often more enthusiastic about capital account liberalization around the world than many developing countries. A noteworthy feature of this theory is that financial and property rights institutions can have different effects on capital flows.

No abstract

Governments worldwide are implementing mass vaccination programs in an effort to end the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Here, we evaluated the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccination program in its early stage and predicted the path to herd immunity in the U.S. By early March 2021, we estimated that vaccination reduced the total number of new cases by 4.4 million (from 33.0 to 28.6 million), prevented approximately 0.12 million hospitalizations (from 0.89 to 0.78 million), and decreased the population infection rate by 1.34 percentage points (from 10.10 to 8.76%). We built a Susceptible-Infected-Recovered (SIR) model with vaccination to predict herd immunity, following the trends from the early-stage vaccination program. Herd immunity could be achieved earlier with a faster vaccination pace, lower vaccine hesitancy, and higher vaccine effectiveness. The Delta variant has substantially postponed the predicted herd immunity date, through a combination of reduced vaccine effectiveness, lowered recovery rate, and increased infection and death rates. These findings improve our understanding of the COVID-19 vaccination and can inform future public health policies.

No abstract

Using two recently constructed measures of trade liberalization dates, this paper studies the impact of trade liberalization on imports, exports, and overall trade balance for a large sample of developing countries. We find strong and consistent evidence that trade liberalization leads to higher imports and exports. However, in contrast to Santos-Paulino and Thirlwall (2004), who found a robustly negative impact of trade liberalization on the overall trade balance, we find only mixed evidence of such a negative impact. In particular, we find little evidence of a statistically significant negative impact using our first measure of liberalization dates, which extends Li (2004). Using a second measure of liberalization dates compiled by Wacziarg and Welch (2003), we find some evidence that liberalization worsens the trade balance, but the evidence is not robust across different estimation specifications, and the estimated impact is smaller than that reported by Santos-Paulino and Thirlwall (2004). , the editor, an anonymous referee for very helpful comments, and Xiangming Li for sharing her data set with us.

The Policy Research Working Paper Series disseminates the findings of work in progress to encourage the exchange of ideas about development issues. An objective of the series is to get the findings out quickly, even if the presentations are less than fully polished. The papers carry the names of the authors and should be cited accordingly. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent.