Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the causal relationship between inward foreign direct investment (FDI) and economic growth in Southern African Development Community (SADC) countries over the period 1980-2012. It also investigates whether the causal relationship between FDI inflows and economic growth is dependent on the level of income.

In order to assess whether the causal relationship between FDI inflows and economic growth is dependent on the level of income, the study divided the SADC countries into two groups, namely, the middle-income countries and the low-income countries. The study used the recent panel-data analysis methods to examine this linkage. The Granger causality test for the middle-income countries was conducted within a vector-error correction mechanism framework; while that of the low-income countries was conducted within a vector autoregressions framework.

The results for the middle-income countries’ panel show that there is a uni-directional causal flow from GDP to FDI, and not vice versa. However, for the low-income countries’ panel, there was no evidence of causality in either direction. The study concludes that the FDI-led growth hypothesis does not apply to SADC countries.

Methodology applied in this study is a bivariate framework which is likely to suffer from the omission of variable bias (Odhiambo, 2008, 2011). Second, the Granger causality analysis employed in this only investigates the direction of causality and whether each variable can be used to explain another, but does not directly test for the mechanisms through which FDI leads to economic growth and economic growth leads to FDI.

Future studies may include a third variable such as domestic savings, exports, or financial development in a trivariate or multivariate panel causality model. A more complete analysis which seeks to explain the channels through which FDI impacts growth is suggested for future studies. Lastly, sector level analysis will help policy makers draft effective industrial policies, which can guide allocation of incentives.

The results of this study support the Growth-led FDI hypothesis, but not the FDI-led growth hypothesis. In other words, it is economic growth that drives FDI inflows into the SADC region and into Southern Africa, and not vice versa. This implies that the recent high economic growth rates that have been recorded in some of the SADC countries, especially the middle-income countries, have led to a massive inflow of FDI into this region.

At the regional level, SADC as a regional bloc has been actively pursuing policies and strategies aimed at attracting FDI into the region. Despite the important role of FDI in economic development, and the increase in FDI inflows into SADC countries in particular, there is a significant dearth of literature on the causal relationship between FDI and economic growth. The study used the recent panel-data analysis methods to examine the causal relationship between FDI and economic growth in SADC countries.

This paper aims to assess whether official development assistance (ODA) or foreign aid has been effective in reducing extreme poverty; test whether the type and source of aid matter; and examine whether political or economic freedom enhances aid effectiveness in developing countries.

The study uses recent dynamic panel estimation techniques (system generalised method of moments), including those methods which deal with endogeneity by controlling for simultaneity and unobserved heterogeneity.

The main findings of the study are: firstly, foreign aid does have a statistically significant poverty reduction effect and the results are consistent across all the three extreme poverty proxies. Secondly, the disaggregation of aid by source and type shows that total aid, grant and bilateral aid are more likely to reduce poverty. Thirdly, political freedom might not be an effective channel through which aid impacts extreme poverty, but aid is more effective in an environment where there is respect for freedom of enterprise.

As with most cross-country aid–growth–poverty dynamic panel data studies, the challenges of establishing robust causality and accounting for the unobserved country-specific heterogeneity remain apparent. However, given the data availability constraints, generalised method of moments is, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, the most robust empirical strategy when T < N. Future research could explore possibilities of individual country analysis, disaggregating countries by income and also examining the direction of causality between foreign aid, poverty and democracy.

The policy implications are that the development partners should continue to focus on poverty reduction as the main objective for ODA; aid allocation should be focused on channels which have more poverty-reduction effect, such as per capita income and economic freedom; and aid recipient countries should also focus on reducing inequality.

The main social implications from this study is that it is possible to reduce poverty through ODA. Second, to enhance the effectiveness of foreign aid, ODA allocation should be focussed on channels, which have more poverty-reduction effect, and the host countries should have economic freedom.

This paper makes a further contribution to the aid effectiveness literature, especially the channels through which foreign aid affects poverty.