“…Non‐resident flows are generally the more unstable component, especially in the context of sudden stops (Korinek and Mendoza, ; Cavallo et al ., ) . In fact, during periods of stress EM residents tend to dispose of overseas assets if the country's reserve buffers are high, offsetting some of the selling pressure by non‐residents (Alberola et al ., ). As a result, non‐resident flows in general and portfolio flows in particular are of predominant importance from a financial stability perspective.…”
Section: Classification Of Capital Flows Analysed In the Literaturementioning
This paper reviews the rapidly growing empirical literature on the drivers of capital flows to emerging markets. The empirical evidence is structured based on the recognition that the drivers of capital flows vary over time and across different types of capital flows. The drivers are classified using the traditional distinction between 'push' and 'pull' drivers, which continues to serve as a useful framework. Push factors like global risk aversion and external interest rates are found to matter most for portfolio debt and equity flows, but somewhat less for banking flows. Pull factors such as domestic output growth, asset returns and country risk matter for all three capital flows components, but most for banking flows.
“…Non‐resident flows are generally the more unstable component, especially in the context of sudden stops (Korinek and Mendoza, ; Cavallo et al ., ) . In fact, during periods of stress EM residents tend to dispose of overseas assets if the country's reserve buffers are high, offsetting some of the selling pressure by non‐residents (Alberola et al ., ). As a result, non‐resident flows in general and portfolio flows in particular are of predominant importance from a financial stability perspective.…”
Section: Classification Of Capital Flows Analysed In the Literaturementioning
This paper reviews the rapidly growing empirical literature on the drivers of capital flows to emerging markets. The empirical evidence is structured based on the recognition that the drivers of capital flows vary over time and across different types of capital flows. The drivers are classified using the traditional distinction between 'push' and 'pull' drivers, which continues to serve as a useful framework. Push factors like global risk aversion and external interest rates are found to matter most for portfolio debt and equity flows, but somewhat less for banking flows. Pull factors such as domestic output growth, asset returns and country risk matter for all three capital flows components, but most for banking flows.
“…Also, their macroeconomic and microeconomic effects may differ significantly, as has been recently argued and shown by the literature on net flows (Kose et al, 2009;Contessi et al, 2010;Fratzscher, 2011;Byrne and Fiess, 2011;Arias et al, 2013) or gross flows (CIEPR, 2012;Forbes and Warnock, 2012;Obstfeld, 2012;Broner et al, 2013). 2 Besides, as stated before, they do not respond in the same way over the cycle or at the time of financial stress (Rothenberg and Warnock, 2011;Milesi-Ferretti and Tille, 2011;Broner et al, 2013;Calderon and Kubota, 2013;Alberola et al, 2015). As for the econometric approach, the authors are not aware of any paper in the international literature that implements a panel co-integration approach to study long-term determinants of capital flows.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…In turn, Broner et al (2013) illustrate that during crises "there is a retrenchment in both inflows by foreigners and outflows by domestic agents." Following this approach, Alberola et al (2015) study the impact of the accumulation of international reserves on the behavior of gross capital flows in periods of global stress. They find that the higher the stock of reserves, the larger the drop in gross domestic outflows, since residents repatriate capitals in order to mitigate the lack of foreign financing.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The second one is associated with pull factors such as productivity growth, macroeconomic conditions, and institutional framework of the countries receiving the resources (Chuhan et al, 1996;Papaioannou, 2009;Milesi-Ferretti and Tille, 2010;Bluedorn et al, 2011). However, they can respond to both push and pull factors (Felices and Orskaug, 2008;Fratzscher, 2011;Arias et al, 2013;Alberola et al, 2015). Moreover, they can also be determined by commercial flows (Valdes-Prieto and Soto, 1998;Milesi-Ferretti and Tille, 2010) and information asymmetry, which affects the behavior of capital flows, among others, because foreign investors usually alter their decisions on account of "herd behavior" and "home bias" (Cont and Bouchaud, 2000;Bikhchandani and Sharma, 2001;Dvořák, 2003).…”
The purpose of this paper is to estimate a model for gross capital flows for a sample of developing economies and assess their long-term determinants by using a panel cointegration approach. Results indicate that there is a co-integration relationship between key push and pull factors and gross capital inflows. Particularly, FDI inflows have a positive, long-term association with GDP growth, and a negative one with public debt and the interest rate differential (the latter being a puzzling finding), while portfolio inflows are connected negatively to foreign asset prices and positively to international financial market volatility. Unexpectedly, interest rate differentials do not exhibit a long-term relationship with the latter, which challenges the standard portfolio assumption -that uncovered interest parity is satisfied, at least, in the long term-. As for disaggregate outflows, no long-term association between them and their drivers could be obtained.Classification JEL: F21, F32, F36, C5
“…Indeed, at very high levels of reserves holding, the moderating impact on output collapse seems disappear. Alberola, Erceb, and Serena () find that large stocks of foreign reserves pay off to mitigate gross capital outflows during periods of systemic financial stress, but, when introducing non‐linear effects through quadratic terms, they show that reserves holding exhibits decreasing returns. In other words, growing reserves accumulation is less and less effective to reduce capital outflows.…”
In a context of increased foreign exchange reserves holding from emerging and developing countries, this paper investigates the diminishing return of reserves holding assumption over the most severe phase of the global financial crisis (2008Q1–2010Q4). Relying on a Panel Smooth Transition Regression model, we highlight the differential effect of the accumulation of foreign exchange reserves for a set of financial vulnerabilities variables. In a specific manner, although reserves accumulation is effective above a critical threshold to cope with vulnerabilities related to the financial channel, we show that it becomes less effective beyond a certain threshold for domestic bank vulnerabilities. Our results are robust to alternative specifications.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.