| 来源类型 | Discussion paper |
| 规范类型 | 论文 |
| 来源ID | DP5125 |
| DP5125 Decentralization and Electoral Accountability: Incentives, Separation and Voter Welfare | |
| Ben Lockwood; Jean Hindricks | |
| 发表日期 | 2005-07-23 |
| 出版年 | 2005 |
| 语种 | 英语 |
| 摘要 | In this paper we test the well-known hypothesis of Obstfeld and Rogoff (2000) that trade costs are the key to explaining the so-called Feldstein-Horioka puzzle. Using a gravity framework in an intertemporal context, we provide strong support for the hypothesis and we reconcile our results with the so-called home bias puzzle. Interestingly, this requires fundamental revision of Obstfeld and Rogoff?s argument. A further novelty of our work is in tying bilateral trade behaviour to desired aggregate trade balances and desired intertemporal trade. |
| 主题 | International Macroeconomics |
| 关键词 | Feldstein-horioka puzzle Trade costs Gravity model Home bias Puzzle Current account Trade balance |
| URL | https://cepr.org/publications/dp5125 |
| 来源智库 | Centre for Economic Policy Research (United Kingdom) |
| 资源类型 | 智库出版物 |
| 条目标识符 | http://119.78.100.153/handle/2XGU8XDN/534013 |
| 推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714 | Ben Lockwood,Jean Hindricks. DP5125 Decentralization and Electoral Accountability: Incentives, Separation and Voter Welfare. 2005. |
| 条目包含的文件 | 条目无相关文件。 | |||||
| 个性服务 |
| 推荐该条目 |
| 保存到收藏夹 |
| 导出为Endnote文件 |
| 谷歌学术 |
| 谷歌学术中相似的文章 |
| [Ben Lockwood]的文章 |
| [Jean Hindricks]的文章 |
| 百度学术 |
| 百度学术中相似的文章 |
| [Ben Lockwood]的文章 |
| [Jean Hindricks]的文章 |
| 必应学术 |
| 必应学术中相似的文章 |
| [Ben Lockwood]的文章 |
| [Jean Hindricks]的文章 |
| 相关权益政策 |
| 暂无数据 |
| 收藏/分享 |
除非特别说明，本系统中所有内容都受版权保护，并保留所有权利。
