Daniel C. Giedeman

Panel evidence on finance, institutions and economic growth

This article investigates whether the level of institutional development affects the link between financial development and economic growth. Using a range of cross-sectional and panel approaches we find that the positive effect of banking development on growth is reduced as the level of institutions (e.g. rule of law, lack of corruption) increases. We do not, however, find a similar result when we examine the joint effect of institutional level and stock market development on economic growth. We attribute these results to the ability of banks to perform functions similar to those provided by well-operating institutions, whereas stock markets do not perform such comparable functions.

Investing In Institutions

Robust institutional change is difficult to achieve. However, it is more difficult for some countries than others. We use data on 69 countries between 1870 and 2000 to show that political instability does not always affect growth outcomes. We then develop a simple model to explain this fact in which the likelihood that “good” institutions are abandoned during periods of political uncertainty depends on the opportunity cost of doing so. We operationalize our model by using contract intensive money as a proxy for this initial investment in growth-enhancing institutions. Cross-sectional and panel growth regressions support the models predictions.

A note on economic freedom and political ideology

ABSTRACT Within the field of public economics, there is the perception that Republicans are associated with ‘small government’ and Democrats with ‘big government’. We test this notion by examining whether economic freedom is affected when a single party is in control of the state legislature. We find no link between party control and our main economic freedom indicator, but we do find a positive link between Republican control and the taxation component of economic freedom, suggesting a Republican legislature leads to lower taxation.

The riegle-neal act and local banking market concentration

The Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 greatly transformed the American banking system by allowing the widespread establishment of interstate bank branching networks. This paper examines possible effects on local banking market concentration that resulted from the provision in the Riegle-Neal Act that allowed states to opt-in to the establishment of de novo interstate branches. Regression analysis using data from more than seven hundred cities does not provide any evidence that allowing the establishment of de novo interstate branches caused increases in local banking market concentration. These results may help alleviate some concerns that passage of the Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act currently pending in Congress will result in lessened competition in local banking markets. Copyright International Atlantic Economic Society 2004

More on the Impact of Economic Freedom on the Black–White Income Gap

Using household-level data from 1980 to 2010, we examine whether economic freedom, as measured by the Economic Freedom of North America Index, has similar effects on white household income as it does on black household income. Our findings suggest that the positive effect of economic freedom found in most studies affects black households less than white households. Further, using the Oaxaca decomposition, our results show that economic freedom is an important factor explaining the gap between black and white household incomes.

Banking and inequality: US state evidence

Abstract The question of how financial development affects economic inequality is a subject of much debate. This paper adds to this literature by examining whether banking deregulation affects income inequality using state-level data from the United States from the late 20th century. Specifically, we test the hypothesis that the deregulation of interstate branch-banking restrictions had an effect on income inequality as measured by the Gini Coefficient and Thiel Index. We conduct our tests using fixed-effects OLS models and System GMM dynamic panel analysis. Our results suggest that branching deregulation has resulted in increased income inequality in the United States.