Capital mobility in African countries: evidence from panel data cointegration tests.
Murthy, N.R. Vasudeva
Abstract
This paper employs the recently developed panel data unit root
tests and the Pedroni panel data cointegration techniques to test the
validity of the Feldstein-Horioka puzzle for a non-stationary and
heterogeneous panel of 17 African countries during the period,
1965-2001. Furthermore, the paper extends the literature by employing
the Pedroni Panel FM-OLS estimators to estimate the savings-retention
coefficient for the panel and individual countries. The empirical
findings reveal that in the African countries studied, the estimated
savings-retention coefficient is relatively small indicating a moderate
degree of capital mobility.
JEL (Classification): C32, F21, F32.
Keywords: Panel unit roots; capital mobility; cointegration, panel
FM-OLS cointegration.
Introduction
The prevalence of capital mobility among countries has many
interesting economic implications for optimization of savings, efficacy
of fiscal and monetary policy actions and the speed of convergence of
countries to the steady-state economic growth. In the economics
literature, the presence of capital mobility is tested alternatively by
using the saving-investment correlation, interest parity condition, and
finally the consumption smoothing approach to the current account. In
this regard, one of the famous international macroeconomic hypotheses
that is concerned with the presence or absence of mobility of capital is
the Feldstein-Horioka Hypothesis (1980), which states that in the
absence of capital mobility, domestic saving and investment are highly
correlated since investment is financed by domestic saving. On the other
hand, provided that saving depends on the intertemporal consumption decision and capital were highly mobile in an open economy, domestic
saving will be very responsive to higher real rate of return globally
and thus the country can finance its investment by foreign saving.
Contrary to the maintained assumption that in the developed countries,
which are generally open-economies and where capital is highly mobile,
Feldstein-Horioka (1980) presented econometric evidence showing that in
a cross-section consisting of 16 OECD countries for the period
1960-1974, saving and investment are highly correlated indicating that
capital indeed is not mobile. Hence this finding is known as the
Feldstein-Horioka Puzzle. A survey of the literature in this area
reveals that there have been many empirical attempts to test the
Feldstein-Horioka Puzzle (hereafter, FH-puzzle) for the Organization for
Economic Co-operation and Development Countries (OECD) (for details see
Murthy (2005), Coakley, et al. (2004), Hoffman (2004), Sinha (2004), Ho
(2003), Banerjee and Zanghieri (2003), Obstfeld and Rogoff (2000) ,
Coakley, et al. (1998) and Jansen (1996, 1998)) and a recent study on
the Asian economies by Kim et al. (2005). While there have been a
limited number of studies on testing the relevance of the FH puzzle for
developing countries (Schneider (2004), Rocha (2000), Montiel (1994),
Vamvakidis and Wacziarg (1998)) , there is a limited number of empirical
attempts to verify the presence of capital mobility using the FH
approach for African countries. The studies that deal with the
phenomenon of capital mobility in developing countries including some
African countries are by De Wet and Koekemoer (2003), Isaksson (2001),
Rocha (2000), Hussein and Mello (1999), Mamingi (1997), Mamingi (1993),
Haque and Montiel (1991), Haque and Montiel (1990), Montiel (1990) and
Dooley, Frankel, and Mathieson (1987). Recently, two recent studies that
exclusively deal with capital mobility in Sub-Saharan Africa, have been
undertaken by Payne and Kumazawa (2005) and De Wet and Van Eyden (2005).
These afore-mentioned studies, which use the panel data for the period
1980-2000, do not undertake a battery of panel unit root and
cointegration tests. In order to fill in the void, the present paper
attempts to employ a battery of new heterogeneous panel unit root and
cointegration tests to empirically assess the validity of the FH puzzle
using a panel of 17 African countries over the period 1965-2001 (1). The
paucity of required data has precluded testing of capital mobility for
African countries, based on interest parity condition and
consumption-smoothing approach to the current account. Use of panel data
besides controlling the country size effects and business cycles effect,
allows for heterogeneity in individual countries, gives more variability
and thus reducing the possibility of collinearity among variables and
finally, being more informative, yields more degrees of freedom.
Increased information from both time-series and cross-sectional data
besides yielding more efficient parameter estimates, renders statistical
inference much more precise. In the case of panel unit root tests, the
estimators and the unit root test statistics are distributed normally
unlike in the case of time-series where they follow complicated Weiner
processes. Additionally, panel data unit root tests and cointegration
tests have greater power and less size distortions than the standard
time series unit root tests (see Levin and Lin (1992)).
Model Specification and Data
In order to test for the existence of a long-run equilibrium
relationship between the investment rate (I/Y) and the saving rate (S/Y)
in a heterogeneous panel consisting of 17 African countries over the
period 1965-2001, the following model is specified:
[(I/Y).sub.it] = [[alpha].sub.i] + [[beta].sub.i][(S/Y).sub.it] +
[[gamma].sub.t] + [[mu].sub.it] ... (1)
i = 1, ..., N and t = 1, ..., T
In model (1), [[alpha].sub.i] show the possibility of country fixed
effects and [[beta].sub.i] allow for heterogeneous cointegrating
vectors. [beta] is called the savings-retention coefficient.
[[gamma].sub.t] represents time-dependent common shocks, captured by
common-time dummies, that might simultaneously affect all the African
countries included in the study. Model (1) is estimated by the recently
proposed Pedroni (2000, 2001) panel Fully-Modified Ordinary Least
Squares cointegration technique (hereafter Panel FM-OLS), which adjusts
for the presence of endogeneity and serial correlation in the data. This
method is an appropriate technique, especially if there are endogenous
macroeconomic factors that can cause co-movements in saving and
investment rates. The data on (I/Y), gross domestic investment as share
of GDP and (S/Y), gross domestic savings as share of GDP are obtained
from World Bank Africa Data Base 2003.
Before estimating model (1), it is required that the order of
integration of the variables be determined by using panel unit root
tests. If both saving rate and investment rate series are found to be
I(1), then by using the Pedroni panel cointegration tests (1999, 2000,
2001), it will be investigated whether they are cointegrated. These
above-mentioned tests and techniques are warranted to make sure that no
spurious regression phenomenon exists in the estimation of
savings-retention coefficient which can be used to infer the presence of
the degree of capital mobility. In order to test for the presence of a
unit root in the panel data series under study, recent panel unit root
tests proposed by Im, Pesaran and Shin (1997, 2003) (hereafter IPS),
Maddala-Wu (1999) (hereafter MW) and the Breitung (2000) tests are
employed. In all these tests, the null hypothesis is non-stationarity
(see for details Baltagi (2003)). Im, Pesaran and Shin (1997, 2003) have
proposed the following panel unit root test statistic, [t.sub.IPS],
which is applicable to heterogeneous cross-sectional panels:
[t.sub.IPS] = [square root of N]([bar.t] -
E[[t.sub.i]|[[rho].sub.i] = 0])/[square root of
Var][[t.sub.i]|[[rho].sub.i] = 0] ~ N(0,1) ... (2)
Where N is the number of countries, [bar.t] is the mean of the
computed Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) statistics for individual
countries included in the panel, [[rho].sub.i], is the auto-regressive
root, E[[t.sub.i]|[[rho].sub.i] = 0] and Var[[t.sub.i]|[[rho].sub.i] =
0] denote respectively, the moments of mean and variance tabulated
obtained from Monte Carlo simulation and tabulated by IPS (1997, 2003).
The statistic [t.sub.IPS] approaches in probability a standard normal
distribution as N and T tend to infinity. The MW panel data unit root
test is a much more flexible test and is applicable even to unbalanced
panels and it is valid for individual ADF tests with different lag
lengths. The MW test statistic [lambda], which has a chi-square
distribution with 2N degrees of freedom under the null hypothesis is
expressed as:
[lambda] = -2[N.summation over (i=1)][l.sub.n][P.sub.i] ... (3)
Where [P.sub.i] refers to the probability values from individual
ADF unit root tests for each country in the panel. Breitung (2000)
formulates a panel unit root test statistic which corrects for the
dramatic loss of power associated with the IPS test when individual ADF
tests include a trend in the specification. Breitung panel unit root
test has greater power than that of IPS test.
In order to determine whether in the panel under study, the series
(I/Y) and (S/Y) are cointegrated, Pedroni's panel cointegration
tests are conducted (see Pedroni (1999)). Following Pedroni (1999,
2001), the null hypothesis of no cointegration against the alternative
of cointegration is tested using the seven test statistics, proposed by
Pedroni, which consist of four panel and three group test statistics.
Each of these panel test statistics under appropriate standardization is
distributed asymptotically as a normal distribution and expressed as
follows:
[[theta].sub.NT] - [mu][square root of N]/[square root of v] [right
arrow] N(0,1) ... (4)
Where, [mu] and v are the mean and variance respectively of the
underlying individual series. The values [mu] and v are simulated and
provided by Pedroni (1999, 2001) and their numerical values depend upon
the presence of a constant, time trend, and the number of regressors in
the cointegration regression. While the critical value at the 5% level
for panel -v statistic is 1.65, for others it is -1.65. The rejection of
the null hypothesis of no cointegration requires that the absolute value
of the calculated test statistics exceed the critical value.
Empirical Results
Table 1 presents the panel unit root test results. The IPS, MW, and
Breitung panel unit root test results for both levels and
first-differences of the series show that the (I/Y)and (S/Y) series in
the panel are integrated of the order one and zero respectively.
In Table 2, the ADF statistics and the associated p-values for
individual countries' ADF tests are reported. The results show that
for the panel and individual countries, the (I/Y) series, with the
exceptions of Burkino Faso and Madagascar, is I(1). The results, not
reported here for space consideration, also indicate that the
first-differenced (I/Y) and S/Y) series are stationary and therefore are
integrated of the order zero, I(0). For the panel and individual
countries, the (S/Y) series, with the exception of Botswana, is I(1).
Thus, the panel unit root tests and the individual ADF tests strongly
suggest that the (I/Y) and (S/Y) series are generated by a
non-stationary stochastic process. Table 3 presents the Pedroni panel
cointegration test results.
The computed panel and group test statistics are well below the
critical value and therefore they reject the null hypothesis of no
cointegration. Since the Pedroni panel cointegration test results
support the existence of a long-run equilibrium relationship between
investment and saving rates, an attempt has been made to estimate the
savings-retention coefficient by employing Pedroni's (2000, 2001)
panel FM-OLS method. Pedroni (2000) has demonstrated that FM-OLS
technique can be modified to make statistical inference in cointegrated
heterogeneous panels with a large cross-section dimension and a
relatively short time-series dimension.
Table 4 reports the savings-retention coefficient estimates using
the individual, and the Panel Group FM-OLS procedures. The panel
savings-retention coefficients estimated with and without common time
dummies are found statistically significant from zero and one at the one
percent level. Common time dummies are incorporated in the panel FM-OLS
to pick up any possible shocks that might affect all the African
countries in the sample, The magnitude of the estimated retention
coefficient for the panel is well below the cutoff point of 0.60, as
suggested by Murphy (1984) indicating that in the African countries a
moderate degree of mobility of capital exists. The majority of the
country-by-country savings-retention coefficients estimated by FM-OLS
method are similar in magnitude and basically they are in agreement with
the panel results. The estimated panel savings-retention coefficient
implies that, contrary to the expected notion, the degree of capital
mobility in African countries is much lower. The panel savings-retention
coefficients are slightly higher than 0.39, those found during the
period 1980-1998 for Asian countries (see Kim, Oh and Jeong, 2005). The
findings of this paper, although not strictly comparable with earlier
studies, are qualitatively consistent with those reported by Payne and
Kumazawa (2005) and Rocha (2000). Rocha (2000), using a sample of 36
developing countries that include several African countries of Botswana,
Egypt, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Mauritius, Nigeria, Senegal, Tunisia and
Zambia, presents empirical evidence to support a high degree of capital
mobility for developing countries Rocha's estimated
savings-retention coefficient is 0.3617, which is significantly
different from zero and one at the one percent level. Payne and Kumazawa
(2005), using Pooled Ordinary Least Squares, Fixed Effects and Random
Effects, report that during the period 1980-2001, the degree of capital
mobility has increased in a sample of 29 Sub-Saharan African countries.
They also highlight the positive and significant impact of foreign aid
and openness on the saving rates in these countries. Dooley, Frankel and
Mathieson (1987) report a savings-retention coefficient of 0.45 for the
period 1960-1973, and 0.61 for the period 1974-1984 for a sample
consisting of 48 developing countries. The findings, reported in this
paper that individual-country results are similar in magnitude and
statistical significance, support that pooling of the data in the
heterogeneous panel is advantageous and appropriate. Furthermore, it has
been demonstrated in the econometrics literature that in the presence of
parameter heterogeneity, the panel data results are much more reliable.
Conclusions
This paper extends the literature on capital mobility by employing
the most recent panel unit root tests and cointegration techniques that
take into consideration the dynamic properties as well as the
cross-sectional variation properties of saving and investment rate
series of 17 African countries over the period 1965-2001. The empirical
findings reported in the paper reveal that in the African countries
included in the sample, a moderate degree of capital prevails and
therefore for these countries, the Feldstein-Horioka puzzle does not
hold valid. The observed moderate degree of capital mobility could be
due to economic reforms and structural adjustments, which are aimed at
liberalization of markets, taking place in many of these countries,
especially during the last two decades. A moderate degree of capital
mobility found in these countries might also reflect the less
diversified nature of these mostly small countries and the inflow of
capital to these countries. The finding of a moderate degree of capital
also implies that in these countries, the prospects for economic growth
need not be severely constrained by the prevailing low level of domestic
savings. Higher capital mobility would indicate that, in these African
countries, the transmission mechanism of the monetary policy now
includes the exchange rate de facto and the monetary authorities find it
hard to pursue independent monetary policies. In the presence of capital
mobility, the distributive impact of monetary policy actions will be
enormous. The presence of moderate capital mobility also suggests a
softened crowding out-effect on investment and it offers the policy
makers in these countries a choice of having a flexible exchange rate
system and pursuing the most important domestic macroeconomic policy
goal, such as inflation targeting. Furthermore, the finding of a
moderate degree of capital mobility reported in this paper denotes that
in these countries, capital control policies have not been very
effective and increased capital inflow into these countries can be a
major source of modern technology. Had capital controls and
restrictions, which are placed in these countries for their implications
for fiscal and monetary policies, been highly effective, then these
countries would have exhibited capital immobility. The presence of a
moderate degree of capital inflow imposes a much warranted, for
augmenting economic growth, discipline on policy makers and politicians
in African countries to adopt and maintain better economic policies.
REFERENCES
Baltagi, H.B. (2003), Econometric Analysis of Panel Data, John
Wiley & Sons Ltd, New York.
Banerjee, A., P. and Zanghieri (2003), "A New Look at the
Feldstein-Horioka Puzzle Using An Integrated Panel," CEPII Working
Paper.
Breitung, J. (2000), "The Local Power of Some Unit Root Tests
for Panel Data," in B. Baltagi (ed.), "Non Stationary Panels,
Panel Cointegration and Dynamic Panels," Advances in Econometrics,
Vol. 15, Jai Press, Amsterdam, 161-178.
Coakley, J., F., Kulasi, and R. Smith (1998). "The
Feldstein-Horioka Puzzle and Capital Mobility: A Review,"
International Journal of Finance and Economics, Vol. 3, 169-188.
Coakley, J., A.M., Fuertes, and Spagnoto (2004). "Is the
Feldstein-Horioka Puzzle History?," Manchester School, Vol. 72,
569-590.
De Wet, A.H., and R. Van Eyden (2005). " Capital Mobility in
Sub-Saharan Africa: A Panel Data Approach", South African Journal
of Economics, Vol.73, 1-22.
De Wet, A. R., and Koekemer (2003). "Capital Mobility in
Sub-Saharan Africa: A Panel Data Approach," Working Paper 2002,
University of Pretoria, 1-33.
Dooley, M., J.Frankel and D. Mathieson (1987), "International
Capital Mobility in Developing Countries versus Industrialized Countries: What Do Savings-Investment Correlations Tell Us?", IMF Staff Papers, Vol. 34, 503-529.
Feldstein, M., and C. Horioka (1980), "Domestic Saving and
International Capital Flows," Economic Journal, Vol. 90, 314-329.
Haque, N., and P. Montiel (1991), "Capital Mobility in
Developing Countries: Some Empirical Tests", World Development,
Vol. 19, No. 10, 1391-1398.
Haque, N.,and P. Montiel (1990), "How Mobile is Capital in
Developing Countries", Economics Letters, Vol.33, 359-362.
He, T.W. (2002). "The Feldstein-Horioka Puzzle revisited
2002," Journal of International Money and Finance, Vol. 21,
555-564.
Hoffman, M. (2004). "International Mobility in the Long-run
and the Short-run: Can We Still Learn from Saving-Investment
Data?," Journal of International Money and Finance, Vol. 23,
113-131.
Hussein, K.A., and L.R. Mello (1999), "International Capital
Mobility in Developing Countries: Theory and Evidence", Journal of
International Money and Finance, Vol.18, 367-381.
Im, K.S., M.H. Pesaran, and Y. Shin (1997), "Testing for Unit
Root in Heterogeneous Panels", University of Cambrdige. DAE Working
Paper, No. 9526.
Im, K.S., M. H. Pesaran, and Y. Shin (2003), "Testing for Unit
Roots in Heterogeneous Panels," Journal of Econometrics, Vol. 115,
53-74.
Isaksso, A. (2001), "Financial liberalization, Foreign Aid,
and Capital Mobility: Evidence from 90 Developing Countries",
Journal of International Markets, Institutions, and Money, Vol.
11,309-338.
Jansen, W.J. (1996), "Estimating Saving-Investment
Correlations: Evidence for OECD Countries based on Error Correction
Model", Journal of International Money and Finance, Vol.15,
749-781.
Jansen, W.J. (1998), "Interpreting Saving-Investment
Correlations," Open Economies Review, Vol. 9, 205-217.
Kim, H., K.Y. Oh, and C.W. Jeong (2005), "Panel Cointegration
Results in International Capital Mobility in Asian Economies,"
Journal of International Money and Finance, Vol. 24, 71-82.
Levin, A., and C.F. Lin (1992), "Unit Root Tests in Panel
Data: Asymptotic and Finite Sample Properties," Discussion Paper
92-93, Department of Economics, University of California at San Diego.
Mamingi, N. (1997), "Savings-Investment Correlations in
Developing Countries", Journal of Policy Modeling, Vol. 19,
605-626.
Mamingi, N. (1993), "Savings-Investment Correlations and
Capital Mobility in Developing Countries", The World Bank Policy
Research Working Paper 1211.
Maddala, G., S., and Wu (1999). "A Comparative Study of Unit
Root Tests and a New Simple Test," Oxford Bulletin of Economic and
Statistics, Vol. 61,631-652.
Montiel, P. (1994), "Capital Mobility in Developing Countries:
Some Measurement Issues and Empirical Estimates", World Bank
Economic Review, 8, 311-350.
Murphy, R. (1984), "Capital Mobility and the Relationship
between Savings and Investment Rates in OECD Countries," Journal of
International Money and Finance, Vol. 3, 327-342.
Murthy, N.R.V. (2005), "The Feldstein-Horioka Puzzle: New
Evidence for the United States", The ICFAI Journal of Applied
Economics, Vol.4, No.l, 7-12.
Obsfeld, M., K. Rogoff (2000), "The Six Puzzles in
International Macroeconomics: Is There a Common Cause?," NBER Working Paper, 7777.
Payne, J.E., and R. Kumazawa (2005), "Capital Mobility,
Foreign Aid, and Openness: Further Panel Data Evidence from Sub-Saharan
Africa", Journal of Economics and Finance, Vol.29, No.l, 122-126.
Pedroni, P. (1999), "Critical Values of Cointegration Tests in
Heterogeneous Panels with Multiple Regressors," Oxford Bulletin of
Economics and Statistics, Vol. 61, Special Issue, 653-670.
Pedroni, P. (2000), "Fully Modified OLS for Heterogeneous
Cointegrated Panels," in Baltagi, B., C.D. Kao (Eds.), Advances in
Econometrics, Nonstationary Panels, Panel Cointegration and Dynamic
Panels, Elsevier Science, New York, 93-130.
Pedroni, P. (2001), "Purchasing Power Parity Tests in
Cointegrated Panels," The Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol.
83, 727-731. Quantitative Micro Software (2004), EVIEWS 5, Irvine,
California.
Rocha, F. (2000), "Capital Mobility in Developing Countries:
Evidence from Panel Data", Universidade de Sao Paulo, Brazil,
Department of Economics Working Paper.
Schneider, B. (2004), "Saving-Investment Correlations and
Capital Mobility in Developing Countries with Special Reference to India
1999," Indian Journal for Research on International Economic
Relations, Working Paper 48.
Sinha, D.(2004), "the Mother of All Puzzles would not Go
Away", Economics Letters, Vol. 82, 259-267.
Vamvakidis, A.A., and R. Wacziarg (1998), "Developing
Countries and the Feldstein-Horioka Puzzle," International Monetary
Fund Working Paper98/2, 1-24.
World Bank (2003). African Data Base, 2003.
NOTES
(1.) The countries included are Algeria, Benin, Botswana, Burkina
Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Congo, Cote d'
Ivories, Egypt, Ghana, Kenya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Morocco and
Niger.
N.R. Vasudeva Murthy, Ph.D., Department of Economics & Finance,
College of Business Administration, Creighton University, 2500
California Plaza, Omaha, NE 68178 USA; Tele: (402)280-2128; Fax: (402)
280-5565; E-mail:
[email protected].
Table 1
Panel Unit Root Tests
Maddala-Wu
Series [t.sub.IPS] [lambda] Breitung
I/Y -1.089 37.281 0.096
(0.138) (0.321) (0.538)
S/Y -0.819 34.060 -0.805
-0.206 -0.465 (0.210)
[DELTA] (I/Y) -3.079 52.059 -4.51
(0.00l) * (0.025) * (0.00) *
[DELTA] (S/Y) -7.16 111.32 -8.56
(0.00l) * (0.0) * (0.0) *
Note Probability values are reported in the parentheses. Lags for I/Y
and S/Y series are 5 and 3, respectively. * Denotes the rejection of
the null hypothesis. The standardized IPS tests are distributed as
N(0,1) and the Maddala-Wu Fisher type test distributed as
[chi square] = with 2N degrees of freedom (34). The critical IPS test,
the one tailed 5 percent critical value is 1.64. All the tests are
conducted with a time trend included in the specification. The critical
values for the MW tests are from EVIEWS 5.0.
Table 2
Individual Country Unit Root Tests (1965-2001): Levels
I/Y S/Y
Country ADF P-Value ADF P-Value
Algeria -2.300 0.421 -1.925 0.619
Benin -1.923 0.619 -1.372 0.851
Botswana -3.386 0.072 -3.345 0.077 ***
Burkina Faso -3.847 ** 0.027 ** -2.123 0.515
Burundi -0.814 0.953 -2.527 0.314
Cameroon -1.884 0.639 -1.425 0.835
Central African Rep. -1.416 0.836 -1.009 0.929
Congo -2.285 0.429 -2.292 0.426
Cote d' Ivorie -2.206 0.469 -2.720 0.235
Egypt -1.892 0.634 -2.486 0.333
Ghana -1.731 0.713 -2.794 0.209
Kenya -2.900 0.176 -2.081 0.537
Madagascar -4.107 * 0.015 * -1.839 0.662
Malawi -2.410 0.368 -2.370 0.387
Mauritius -1.474 0.817 -2.345 0.399
Morocco -1.869 0.646 -3.127 0.117
Niger -1.845 0.658 -2.897 0.176
Note. * ** and *** Denote significance at the 1%, 3%, and 8% levels,
respectively. For I/Y and S/Y, lags are 5 and 3, respectively.
Table 3
Pedroni Panel Cointegration Tests
Test Statistic Value
Panel [upsilon]-statistic 0.781 *
Panel [sigma]-statistic -4.609 *
Panel [rho][rho]-statistic -6-292 *
Panel ADF-statistic -5.274 *
Group [sigma]-statistic -2.894 **
Group [rho][rho]-statistic -5.808 *
Group ADF-statistic -5.481 *
Note: Results with trend and time dummies. All tests reported here are
distributed as N(0,1). * and ** denote significance at the 1% and 5%
levels, respectively.
Table 4
FMOLS: Individual and Panel Cointegration Coefficients
Country Savings retention coefficient
Algeria 0.36 [1.97] **
Benin 0.02 [0.12]
Botswana 0.90 [4.17] *
Burkina Faso 0.09 [0.32] *
Burundi 0.64 [5.94] *
Cameroon 0.88 [4.74] *
Central African Rep. 0.18 [1.46]
Congo 0.69 [6.82] *
Cote d'Ivories 0.91 [3.35] *
Egypt 0.38 [0.66]
Ghana 0.37 [4.04] *
Kenya 0.58 [1.69] ***
Madagascar 0.32 [2.26] *
Malawi -0.01 [-0.06]
Mauritius 0.46 [1.20]
Morocco 0.69 [7.70] *
Niger 0.50 [3.44] *
Panel Group FMOLS 0.47 [12.08] *
(without Dummies) [beta] = 1 [13.25] *
Panel Group FMOLS 0.49 [9.36] *
(with Dummies) [beta] = 1 [10.20] *
Note: With common time Dummies included. * and ** denote significance
at the 5% and 10% levels, respectively.