1、中文 3000 字 本科毕业论文外文翻译 外文题目： Terms of trade and economic growth in Japan and Korea:an empirical analysis 出 处： Empir Econ (2010) 38:139158 作 者： Hock Tsen Wong 原 文： Terms of trade and economic growth in Japan and Korea:an empirical analysis 1 .Introduction Terms of trade and terms of trade volatility ha
2、ve a critical impact on economic growth, particularly during world episodes of global integration or disintegration when export prices converge or diverge worldwide, inducing large terms of trade changes andeconomy-wide responses . However, their inuence is ambiguous. An increase in terms of trade c
3、ould either lead to an increase or a decrease in economic growth. Generally, an increase in terms of trade will lead to an increase in investment and thus economic growth will increase. Mendoza, Bleaney and Greenaway , and Blattman et al. , amongst others, report a positive impact of terms of trade
4、on economic growth. Eicher et al.develop an inter-temporal model to examine the impact of a decrease in terms of trade on current account and output, with the focus on a developing country. The model shows that a decrease in terms of trade will have a negative effect on income and wealth. In the lon
5、g run, a decrease in terms of trade will lead to a proportional decrease in the debt level of an economy whilst output, capital, and borrowing will not change. Thus a change in terms of trade will only affect economic growth in the short run and not in the long run. A high terms of trade volatility
6、will lead to the re-allocation of both input and output because of aversion to risk. This will involve costs and losses, and thus economic growth will decrease. This is particularly important where hedge markets are incomplete. Empirical studies into the impact of terms of trade and terms of trade v
7、olatility on economic growth are dominated by cross-country research. Nonetheless, it is interesting to examine the impact of terms of trade and terms of trade volatility on a particular economy. This study examines the impact of terms of trade on real gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in Japa
8、n and Korea using time series data. Japan is a relatively large closed economy whilst Korea is a relatively small open economy. Moreover, Japan has achieved a low economic growth rate over the past few decades, whilst Korea has achieved a relatively high economic growth rate. This study thus provide
9、s some evidence of whether terms of trade have contributed significantly to a relatively low or high economic growth. The impact of terms of trade on economic growth is argued to be different across economies. Fur- thermore, this study examines the impact of terms of trade volatility on real GDP per
10、 capita. In addition, the impact of oil price and nancial development on real GDP per capita is examined. Japan and Korea are both oil importing countries. Therefore this study provides some evidence of the impact of oil price on economic growth in a relatively large closed economy and a relatively
11、small open economy. The empirical estimation is based on an augmented production function . The Dickey and Fuller and Phillips and Perron unit root test statistics are used to examine the stationarity of the data. The ohansen cointegration method is used to examine the long-run relationship between
12、terms of trade and real GDP per capita. The cointegration method is able to test the existence of more than one cointegrating vector in a system.The generalised forecast error variance decomposition and generalised impulse response function are used to examine the rela- tionship of variables in a sy
13、stem. The generalised forecast error variance decompositions and generalised impulse response functions solve the orthogonalised problem of the forecast error variance decompositions and impulse response functions of Sims. The problem is that the latter approaches are sensitive to the order of the v
14、ariables in the vector autoregressive (VAR) system. This article is organised as follows. Section 2 discusses the literature review of terms of trade and economic growth. Section 3 explains the methodology and data in this study. Section4 presents empirical results and discussions. Section 5 provide
15、s some concluding remarks. 2. Literature review of terms of trade and economic growth There are many studies on the relationship between terms of trade and economic growth. Mendoza examines the impact of terms of trade on economic growth in 40 industrial and developing countries using cross-sectiona
16、l data for the period 19711991. The results show a positive impact of terms of trade on economic growth. Moreover, terms of trade shocks are reported to account for nearly half the changes in actual GDP. Furthermore, economic growth is found to be slower in countries with higher terms of trade volat
17、ility. Bleaney and Greenaway examine the impact of terms of trade on economic growth in 14 sub-Saharan African countries using cross-sectional data for the period 19801995. They nd that an increase in terms of trade will lead to an increase in economic growth. Hadass and Williamson examine the relat
18、ionship between terms of trade and economic growth using cross-sectional data for the period 18701940. They nd that although terms of trade movement favours primary product exporters, it reduces their economic growth. Moreover, there is strong evidence of asymmetry in economic growth between the cor
19、e and the periphery. Generally, the impact of terms of trade on economic growth is very small for both the core and the periphery. In the pre-war period, changes in terms of trade explained less than one-fth of economic growth, which is expressed by the GDP per capita growth rate. Nonetheless, the s
20、tudy covers few of the developing countries that remained poor up to World War II. On the other hand, Blattman et al. analyse more than half a century of pre-World War II data, 18701938, for 35 countries. They nd that terms of trade have a significant impact on economic growth. Moreover, the impact
21、of terms of trade is greater on the periphery than in the core. A decline in terms of trade experienced by the periphery represented a significant drag on economic growth during those seven decades. Furthermore, there is asymmetry between the core and the periphery. Terms of trade or terms of trade
22、volatility seem to have played little role in the core, despite the fact that terms of trade volatility were almost as high in the core as on the periphery.5 However, terms of trade appear to have played an important role in explaining the economic growth of the periphery. The core could escape the
23、damaging consequences of terms of trade instability, an escape that was apparently unavailable to primary product exporters of the periphery. Blattman et al. employ a panel data analysis for 35 countries for the period 18701939. They report the same conclusions they obtained earlier. They nd that te
24、rms of trade secular change or long-run change have a significant impact on economic growth.6 The impact of terms of trade secular change is more important on the periphery than in the core. Nonetheless, terms of trade secular change is less important than terms of trade volatility for economic growth. The impact of terms of trade differs between the core and the periphery. Turnovsky and Chattopadhyay examine the impact of various sources of volatility on
