Abstract
Abstract. The study inspects the effect of fiscal measures on private investment in Selected African countries between 1980-2016.The study adopts Panel Autoregressive Distributed Lag (PARDL) Bounds testing approach develop by Pesaran, Shin & Smith (2001) in estimating the relevant relationship. The results of the long run estimates show that show that interest on debt payment, government expenditure, expected inflation, exchange rate and government tax revenue, all have positive relation with private Iivestment among five selected African countries, suggesting that fiscal measures have crowd in effects on private investment in the long run. While, the results of the short run dynamics show that change in the previous one lagged periods of the variables negative impacts on private investment, whereas the lagged two of the variables shows positive impacts on private investment in the short run, suggesting that there is a crowd out fiscal measures crowd out private investment in among the five selected African countries. The study recommends that the policy makers need to ensure fiscal discipline, if private investment must survive in African.
Keywords. Fiscal Measures, Private investment, Africa, Exchange rate.
JEL. H30, E20, E65.References
Atukeren, E. (2005). Interaction between public and private investment: Evidence from developing countries, International Review for Social Sciences, 58(3), 307-330. doi. 10.1111/j.0023-5962.2005.00290.x
Akpdodje, G. (1998). Macroeconomic policies and private investment in Nigeria. In B. Aigbokhan, (Ed) The Nigerian Economic Society, Ibadan, pp.59-74.
Blanchard, O. & Perotti, R. (2002). An empirical characterization of dynamic effects of changes in government spending and taxes output. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(4), 1329-1368. doi. 10.1162/003355302320935043
Hermes, N. & Lenslink, R. (2001). Capital flight and the uncertainty of government. Economics Letter, 71(3), 377-381. doi. 10.1016/S0165-1765(01)00392-5
Hussain, A., Muhammad, S., & Akram, K. (2009). Effectiveness of government expenditure crowding in or crowding out: Empirical evidence in case of Pakistan. European Journal of Economics, Finance, and Administration Science, 16, 144-148.
Kao, C. (1999). Spurious regression and residual based testing for cointegration in panel data. Journal of Econometrics, 90(1), 1-44. doi. 10.1016/S0304-4076(98)00023-2
Keynes, J.M. (1936).The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money.
Im, K., Pasaran, H., & Shin, Y. (2003). Testing for unit roots in heterogenous panels. Journal of Econometrics, 115(1), 1-24. doi. 10.1016/S0304-4076(03)00092-7
Levine, A., Lin, F., & Chu, F. (2002). Unit root test in panel data: Asymptotic and finite sample properties. Journal of Econometrics, 108, 53-74. doi. 10.1016/S0304-4076(01)00098-7
Madni, R. (2013). Instrumental effects of fiscal policy for Pakistan economy. Romanian Economic Journal, 16(50), 27-50.
Madni, R. (2014). Taxation, fiscal deficit and inflation in Pakistan. The Romanian Economic Journal, 17(53), 41-60.
Madni, R., & Chaudhary, M. (2017). Economic growth in context of institutions and fiscal policy. Pakistan Economic and Social Review. 55(1), 79-98.
Mahmoudazadeh, M., Sadeghi, S., & Sadeghi, S. (2013) Fiscal spending and crowding out effect: A comparison between developing and developed countries. Institutions and Economics, 5(1), 31-40. doi.
Omojolaibi, J., Okenesi, Touch-Nze., & Mesagan, E.P. (2016) Fiscal policy and private investment in selected West African countries. CBN Journal of Applied Statistics, 7(1), 277-309.
Pedroni, P. (1997). Panel cointegration; Asymptotic and finite-sample properties of pooled time series, with an application to PPP hypothesis: New results. Indiana University Working Paper in Economics. [Retrieved from].
Pesaran, M.H., Shin, Y., & Smith, R.J. (2001). Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of the level relationship. Journal of Applied Economics, 16, 289-326. doi. 10.1002/jae.616
Sineviciene, L., & Vasiliauskate, A. (2012). Fiscal policy interaction with private investment: The case of Baltic State. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economic, 23(3), 233-241. doi. 10.5755/j01.ee.23.3.1934
