Innovation in <scp>A</scp>frica: Why Institutions Matter

Oluwatobi, Stephen; Efobi, Uchenna; Olurinola, Isaiah Oluranti; Alege, Philip O.

doi:10.1111/saje.12071

Cited by 161 publications

(99 citation statements)

References 40 publications

(51 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this light, the study adopts the governance indicators from Kaufmann et al, consistent with a recent stream of literature on unbundling (Gani, 2011;Andrés & Asongu, 2013;Andrés et al, 2015;Oluwatobi et al, 2015;Yerrabit & Hawkes, 2015;Pelizzo & Nwokora, 2016 and bundling (Asongu, 2016;Nwachukwu, 2016a, 2016b) governance dynamics.…”

Section: Clarification Of Governancementioning

confidence: 97%

Foreign Aid, Instability and Governance in Africa

Asongu

Nnanna²

2019

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study contributes to the attendant literature by bundling governance dynamics and focusing on foreign aid instability instead of foreign aid. We assess the role of foreign aid instability on governance dynamics in fifty three African countries for the period 1996-2010. An autoregressive endogeneity-robust Generalized Method of Moments is employed. Instabilities are measured in terms of variance of the errors and standard deviations. Three main aid indicators are used, namely: total aid, aid from multilateral donors and bilateral aid. Principal Component Analysis is used to bundle governance indicators, namely: political governance (voice & accountability and political stability/no violence), economic governance (regulation quality and government effectiveness), institutional governance (rule of law and corruption-control) and general governance (political, economic and institutional governance). Our findings show that foreign aid instability increases governance standards, especially political and general governance. Policy implications are discussed. JEL Classification: C53; F35; F47; O11; O55

show abstract

Section: Clarification Of Governancementioning

confidence: 97%

Foreign Aid, Instability and Governance in Africa

Asongu

Nnanna²

2019

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, priorities of the Beijing model and Washington consensus which are respectively economic governance and political governance cannot be measured without bundling some constituent indicators, namely: regulation quality and government effectiveness for economic governance and voice & accountability and political stability for political governance. The above paradigm shifts in the conception and measurement of institutions is motivating a growing stream of literature on the comparative African economics of governance for development outcomes, inter alia: (i) most relevant governance mechanisms in stimulating innovation (Oluwatobi et al, 2015) and (ii) negative government signals of the Arab Spring (Asongu & Nwachukwu, 2016a).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Comparative African Economics of Governance in Fighting Terrorism

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Disclaimer: AFEA Working Papers describe research in progress by the author(s) that has been peer-reviewed and forthcoming in scientific outlets. There is a tacit acknowledgement of anonymous referees for constructive suggestions and critiques that have helped improve the content and rigour of the study. Each research stands on its merit and the views expressed in AFEA Working Papers are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of the AFEA, its Executive Board, or AFEA management. AbstractThis study assesses the comparative economics of governance in fighting terrorism in 53 African countries for period 1996-2012. Four terrorism variables are used, namely: domestic, transnational, unclear and total terrorism dynamics. Nine bundled and unbundled governance variables are employed, notably: political stability/no violence, voice & accountability, political governance, government effectiveness, regulation quality, economic governance, corruption-control, the rule of law and institutional governance. The empirical evidence is based on Fixed Effects regressions. In the analytical procedure, we first bundle governance indicators by means of principal component analysis before engaging the empirical exercise with the full sample. In the final step, specifications are based on a decomposed full sample in order to articulate the fundamental characteristics for comparative purposes. The following broad findings are established. First, good governance is an appealing tool in fighting terrorism. Second, the relevance of the good governance dynamics is as follows in order of increasing relevance: economic governance, institutional governance and political governance. The findings are presented in increasing order of magnitude to emphasise fundamental features in which governance dynamics have the highest effect in mitigating terrorism. JEL Classification: C52; D74; F42; O38 ; P37

show abstract

“…Currents in this stream of KE literature have included, inter alia: (i) general discourses on KE (Aubert, 2005;Rooney, 2005;Lin, 2006;Makinda, 2007;Anyanwu, 2012); (ii) education (Weber, 2011;Kamara et al, 2007;Amavilah, 2009;Ford, 2007;Oluwatobi & Olurinola, 2015); (iii) indigenous knowledge systems (Lwoga et al, 2010;Raseroka, 2008); (iv) communication and information technologies (Maurer, 2008;Jonathan & Camilo, 2008;Aker & Mbiti, 2010;Ondiege, 2010;Chavula, 2010;Merritt, 2010;Butcher, 2011;Thacker, & Wright, 2012;Penard et al, 2012;Demonbynes & Thegeya, 2012;Asongu, 2013aAsongu, , 2014a; (v) economic incentives and institutional regime (Andrés & Asongu, 2013a;Cogburn, 2003;Letiche, 2006); (vi) innovation (Oyelaran-Oyeyinka & Sampath, 2007;Carisle et al, 2013;Oluwatobi et al, 2014);(vii) intellectual capital and economic development (Wagiciengo & Belal, 2012;Preece, 2013); (viii) research and development (Sumberg, 2005;German & Stroud, 2007); (ix) intellectual property rights (Zerbe, 2005;Lor & Britz, 2005;Myburgh, 2011;Asongu, 2013b…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Foreign Aid, Education and Lifelong Learning in Africa

Asongu

Tchamyou

2017

J Knowl Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates the effect of foreign aid on education and lifelong learning in 53 African countries for the period 1996-2010. Three main issues are assessed, notably: (i) the effect of aid on education; (ii) the incremental impact of aid on education and (iii) the effect of aid on lifelong learning. Lifelong learning is measured as the combined knowledge acquired during the primary, Third, the effects of aid dynamics on secondary and tertiary school enrolments are not significant.We also contribute to the literature by proposing an indicator of lifelong learning for developing countries.JEL Classification: I20; I28; F35; O55; P16

show abstract

Innovation in Africa: Why Institutions Matter

Cited by 161 publications

References 40 publications

Foreign Aid, Instability and Governance in Africa

Foreign Aid, Instability and Governance in Africa

The Comparative African Economics of Governance in Fighting Terrorism

Foreign Aid, Education and Lifelong Learning in Africa

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About