2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.eap.2019.07.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Foreign aid and growth nexus: Empirical evidence from India and Sri Lanka

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
21
0
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
4
21
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…It shows that an increase of 1% in the AID, FDI, and DI leads to an increase in economic growth by 0.092, 0.146, and 0.118%, respectively. However, the positive relationship that is founded between AID and economic growth is in line with the prior studies of Alemu and Lee (2015), Dalgaard et al (2004), Jena and Sethi (2019), Karras (2006), Ndambendia and Njoupouognigni (2010), Sethi et al (2019), Sothan (2018), and Tait et al (2015), but contrary to Mallik (2008), Liew et al (2012), Niyonkuru (2016), and Yiew and Lau (2018), who found a negative impact of AID on growth in recipient countries. Besides, the positive nexus between FDI and economic growth is similar to previous empirical studies of Borensztein et al (1998), Emmanuel (2014), Olawumi and Olufemi (2016), Umoh et al (2012), Onuoha et al (2018), and Zekarias (2016), suggesting that FDI is an important vehicle for the transfer of technology, which contributes to technological progress and creates a spillover effect, and thereby raises the long‐term growth rate.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 88%
“…It shows that an increase of 1% in the AID, FDI, and DI leads to an increase in economic growth by 0.092, 0.146, and 0.118%, respectively. However, the positive relationship that is founded between AID and economic growth is in line with the prior studies of Alemu and Lee (2015), Dalgaard et al (2004), Jena and Sethi (2019), Karras (2006), Ndambendia and Njoupouognigni (2010), Sethi et al (2019), Sothan (2018), and Tait et al (2015), but contrary to Mallik (2008), Liew et al (2012), Niyonkuru (2016), and Yiew and Lau (2018), who found a negative impact of AID on growth in recipient countries. Besides, the positive nexus between FDI and economic growth is similar to previous empirical studies of Borensztein et al (1998), Emmanuel (2014), Olawumi and Olufemi (2016), Umoh et al (2012), Onuoha et al (2018), and Zekarias (2016), suggesting that FDI is an important vehicle for the transfer of technology, which contributes to technological progress and creates a spillover effect, and thereby raises the long‐term growth rate.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 88%
“…We revealed a positive, but weak link between AGR and NODA variables. This finding well agrees with Sethi et al [126] who revealed insignificant impacts of foreign aid inflows on economic growth in India and Sri Lanka in both short-run and long-run perspectives. However, Sethi et al [126] assumed that aid and development assistance tended to be more effective in countries with more developed economic policies and more sound public institutions.…”
Section: Model 2: Agriculture Developmentsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…This finding well agrees with Sethi et al [126] who revealed insignificant impacts of foreign aid inflows on economic growth in India and Sri Lanka in both short-run and long-run perspectives. However, Sethi et al [126] assumed that aid and development assistance tended to be more effective in countries with more developed economic policies and more sound public institutions. In lower-income countries, foreign aid inflows should be directed to the agricultural sector in the form of purchasing agricultural machinery, fertilizers, seeds, and other inputs.…”
Section: Model 2: Agriculture Developmentsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…To determine causality and its direction, if any, between tourism sector growth (T t ) and economic growth (Y t ), the study will employ the Wiener-Granger causality technique, popularly known as the Granger causality test ( Granger, 1988 ). Granger causality has a strength of assessing the effect of lag values of one variable on the current value of another variable ( Bates et al., 2013 ; Hamdan et al., 2020 ; Obadiaru et al., 2020 ; Sethi et al., 2019 ). The annual percentage change of the real effective exchange rate (R t ) is also introduced into the model to address the problem of omitted variable bias.…”
Section: Data Conceptual Approach and Methodologymentioning
confidence: 99%