Search results

The purpose of this paper is to undertake an econometric investigation of the determinants of the nominal South African rand/US dollar exchange rate before and after the country's financial liberalisation in March 1995.

Regression models are used to examine the changing relationships between the nominal rand/dollar exchange rate and the determinants of capital flows, fundamentals, and country‐specific factors over the long‐run of 1988 to 2007, as well as over the sub‐sample periods of 1988 to 1995, and 1995 to 2007.

The results show that the factors that are associated with the rand/dollar exchange rate are different before and after the country's financial liberalisation. Prior to 1995, bond and equity purchases by non‐residents, the long‐term interest rate differential, political risk, and the Dollar price of gold were highly significant. However, post‐1995, only the net purchases of shares on the Johannesburg stock exchange (JSE) by non‐residents and the long‐term interest rate differential are significant.

The results suggest that the Rand has changed from being a “commodity currency” in the years before 1995 to being an “equity currency” after 1995.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether new sovereign credit rating (SCR) changes are valuable, and relevant information is provided to bond and equity markets in 30 African countries that received an SCR during the period 1994–2014.

This study applies a combination of GARCH models and event study techniques.

This study shows that the financial markets do not significantly react to SCR announcements, possibly because these African markets are already perceived to be risky.

At last, a significant portion of Africa’s sovereign debt is held by foreign investors (Arslanalp and Tsuda, 2014) who commonly preclude asset managers from investing in low SCR grades. Thus, an unfavorable SCR announcement could lead to a withdrawal of these funds, which could significantly alter both fiscal and monetary policies in the economy.

SCRs is immaterial to investors holding African securities.

Although financial markets are weakly responsive to SCR announcements, they appear to be informationally important in the operation of stocks and bond markets in Africa. Therefore, governments should appreciate the long-term information exchange between investors and borrowers, and the consequential nature of credit ratings in Africa’s nascent financial markets in order to proactively manage the risks of negative ratings.

Studies on credit rating effects on Africa markets are rare.

This study investigates (1) whether democratization drives sovereign credit ratings (SCR) changes (the “democratic advantage”) or whether SCR changes affect democratization, (2) whether the degree of democratization in sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries affects the associations and (3) whether the associations are significantly affected by resource dependence.

This study investigates the effects of SCR changes on democracy in 22 SSA countries over the period of 2000–2020 VEC Granger causality/block exogeneity Wald tests, and impulse responses and variance decomposition analyses with Cholesky ordering and Monte Carlo standard errors in a panel VECM framework.

The full sample impulse responses find that a SCR shock has a long-run detrimental effect on the democracy and political rights but only a short-run positive impact on civil liberties. Among the sub-samples, it is found that the extent of natural resource dependence does not affect the magnitude of SCR shocks on democratization mentioned above but it is found that a SCR shock affects long-run democracy in SSA countries that are relatively more democratic but is more likely to drive democratic deepening in less democratic SSA countries. The full sample variance decompositions further finds that the variance of SCR to a political rights shock outweighs the effects of all the macroeconomic factors, whereas in more diversified SSA countries, the variances of SCR are much greater for democracy and political rights shocks, which suggests that democratization and political rights in diversified SSA economies are severely affected by SCR changes. In the case of the high and low democracy sub-samples, it is found that the variance of SCR in the relatively higher democracy sub-sample is greater than in the low democracy sub-sample.

These results have three implications for democratization in SSA. First, the effect of a SCR change is not a democratically agnostic and impacts political rights to a greater extent than civil liberties. Second, SCR changes have the potential to spark a negative cycle in SSA countries whereby a downgrade leads to a deterioration in socio-political stability coupled with increased financial economic constraints that in turn drive further downgrades and macroeconomic hardship. Finally, SCR changes are potentially detrimental for democracy in more democratic SSA countries but democratically supportive in less democratic SSA countries. Thus, SSA countries that are relatively politically sophisticated are more exposed to the effects of SCR changes, whereas less politically sophisticated SSA countries can proactively shape their SCRs by undertaking political reforms.

This study is the first to examine the associations between SCR and democracy in SSA. This is critical literature for the Africa’s scholarly work given that the debate on unfair rating actions and claims of subjective rating methods is ongoing.

This paper investigates whether democracy plays a mediating role in the relationship between foreign direct investment (FDI) and inequality in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA).

The empirical analysis is conducted using fixed effects and system GMM (Generalised Method of Moments) on a panel of 38 Sub-Saharan African countries covering the period of 1990–2018.

The results find that FDI has no direct effect on inequality whereas democracy reduces inequality directly in both the short run and the long run. The sensitivity analyses find that democracy improves equality regardless of the magnitude of FDI, resource endowment or democratic deepening whereas FDI only reduces inequality once a moderate level of democracy has been achieved.

The results discussed above thus have four policy implications. First, these results show that although democracy has inequality reducing benefits, SSA is unlikely to significantly reduce inequality unless the region purposefully diversifies its trade and FDI away from natural resources. Second, the region should continue to expand credit access to reduce inequality and attract FDI. Third, policymakers should undertake reforms that will reduce youth inequality. Lastly, the region should focus on long-run democratic reforms rather than on short-run democratization to improve governance and investor confidence.

Although there are existing studies that examine the association between FDI and inequality, FDI and democracy and democracy and inequality, this is the first study to explicitly examine the effect of democracy on the association between FDI and inequality in SSA, and the first study to separately consider the possible varied effects of contemporaneous democratization versus the long-run accumulation of democratic capital. In addition, rather than measure inequality by income alone, this study uses the more appropriate Human Development Index to account for SSA's sociological, education and income disparities.