This article assesses the non-linear effects of investment in road infrastructure on the structural competitiveness of the economy of Burkina Faso. After selecting a period from 1980 to 2015, we estimated two econometric models. These are the quadratic estimation and that of the spline. The results obtained revealed a non-linearity between the structural competitiveness of the economy and investment in road infrastructure. Indeed, the quadratic estimation made it possible to identify a non-linearity in the shape of an inverted U with an optimal threshold of 10.11%. Regarding the spline estimation, it provided an optimal interval of [5%; 15%]. In this interval, a 1% increase in investment in road infrastructure improves structural competitiveness by 0.018%. However, beyond 15%, a 1% increase in investment in road infrastructure leads to a decrease in structural competitiveness by 0.013%. In view of these results, the implication of economic policy that emerges is that in order to benefit from optimal structural competitiveness, the share of investment in road infrastructure in the total investment budget must be between 5% and 15%.
| Published in | International Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Sciences (Volume 8, Issue 3) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.ijefm.20200803.12 |
| Page(s) | 98-107 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Structural Competitiveness, Investment in Road Infrastructure, Non-linearity, Burkina Faso
| [1] | Smith, A. (1776). An Inquiry into the Nature and Cause of the Wealth of Nations. Oxford University Press. |
| [2] | Aschauer, DA (1989a). Is public expenditure productive? Journal of monetary Economics, 23, pp 177-200. |
| [3] | Aschauer, DA (1989b). Public Investment and Productivity Growth in the Group of Seven. Economic Perspectives, pp 17-25. |
| [4] | Barro, RJ (1990). Gouvernment spending in a simple model of endogenous growth. Journal of Political Economy, pp 125-130. |
| [5] | Kopp, A. (2007). Incidence des investissements routiers sur la productivité macroéconomique-réevaluation du cas de l'Europe Occidentale. OCDE/CEMT de recherche sur les transports, pp 79-102. |
| [6] | Banque mondiale. (2017). Evaluation des politiques et des institutions en Afrique. Banque mondiale. |
| [7] | MI. (2016). Programme d'investissement public. Ougadougou: Ministère des infrastructures. |
| [8] | BCEAO. (2016, 07 18). Base de données. Récupéré sur Banque Centrale des Etats de l'Afrique de l'Ouest - www.bceao.int: http://www.bceao.int |
| [9] | Roy, W. (2004). L'investissement public dans les infrastructures de transport est (il source de croissance endogène? Lyon 2: Laboratoire d'économie des transports. |
| [10] | Barro, RJ (1997). Determinants of Economics Growth: A Cross-Country Empirical Study. MIT Press. |
| [11] | OCDE. (2009). L’investissement en infrastructures: liens avec la croissance et rôle des politiques publiques. Réformes économiques. |
| [12] | Barro, RJ, et Sala-I-Martin, X. (1996). La croissance économique. Collection sciences économiques, MCGRAW-HILL/EDISCIENCE. |
| [13] | Bamba, NL (2005). L'économie monetaire de la Cote d’Ivoire: une économie d'endettement ou une économie de marché financier? CAPEC. |
| [14] | Hulten, CR (2007). Infrastructures de transport, productivité et externalité. OCDE. |
| [15] | Ford, R., and Poret, P. (1991). Infrastructure and Private Sector Productivity. OECD, 1-28. |
| [16] | Carlino, G., and Voith, R. (1992). Accounting for Differences in Aggregate State Productivity. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 597-617. |
| [17] | Lafay, G. (1995). La compétitivité européenne face au durcissement de la concurrence internation. Révue économoique, 679-689. |
| [18] | Mody, A., and Reinfeld, W. (1995). Advanced Infrastructure for Time Management: The Competitiveness Edge in East Asian. The Wold Bank, Washington. |
| [19] | Fernald, JG (1999). Roads to Prosperity? Assessing the Link between Public Capital and Productivity. American Economic Review. |
| [20] | Sutherla nd, D., Araujo, S., Egert, B., and Kozluk, T. (2009). Infrastructure Investment: Links to Growth and the Role of Public Policies. OECD. |
| [21] | Bogetic, Z., Espina, C., and Noer, J. (2007). Cote d’Ivoire: Competitiveness, Cocoa and the Real Exchange Rate. The World Bank. |
| [22] | Lessoua, A., et Sokic, A. (2012). Union monétaire et compétitivité comparée: les cas de la zone euro et de la zone CFA. Bureau d'économie théorique et appliquée (BETA), 19-25. |
| [23] | Krugman, P. (1994). Competitiveness: A Dangerous Obsession. Foreign Affairs. |
| [24] | Dumont, JC, et Mesple-Somps, S. (2000). L'impact des infrastructures publiques sur la compétitivité et la croissance: Une analyse en EGC appliquée au Sénégal. Développement Insertion Internationale (DIAL). |
| [25] | Djahini, E. (2015). The Main Determinants of International Competitiveness in Sub-Saharan Africa. Munich Personal RePEC Archive, 1-27. |
| [26] | Sirpe, G. (1994). Le transport routier de marchandises au Burkina Faso: un essai d'analyse économique. Ouagadugou: CEDRES ETUDES. |
| [27] | Sirpe, G. (2003). Transport routier et ecoulement des produits agricoles: une analyse économique de l'influence des transports routiers sur les mouvements interrégionaux de céréales au Burkina Faso. Ouagadougou: Press Universitaires de Ouagadougou. |
| [28] | Banque Mondiale, (2009). Rapport sur le développement dans le monde. Banque mondiale. |
| [29] | Sirima, B., Monga, C., Bambara, D., Pare, N., Savadogo, K., N'Cho-Oguie, C., & Charleir, F. (2001). Competitiveness and Economic Growth: policies, strategies and actions. Ouagadougou: Ministry of Economy and Finance of Burkina Faso. |
| [30] | Christel, A., et AFUA, E. (2010). Coûts du transport et de la logistique sur le corridor Tema-Ouagadougou. Agence Américaine pour le De veloppment International. |
| [31] | Hansen, BE (1996). Inference when a Nuisance Parameter is not Identified Under the Null Hypothesis. Econometrica, 413-430. |
| [32] | Hansen, BE (1999). Threshold Effects in Non-dynamic Panels: Estimation, Testing and Inference. Journal of Econometrics, 345-368. |
| [33] | Gonzalez, A., Teräsvirta, T., and Dijk, VD (2005). Panel Smooth Transition Regression Models. Stockholm School of Economics. |
| [34] | Omrane Belguith, S., Chakrou n, M., et Badr Gabsi, F. (2017). Effets non linéaires de la dette publique sur la croissance économique des pays MENA: évaluation empirique à l'aide d'un modèle PSTR. Revue Economique et Monétaire (REM) (21), 1-24. |
| [35] | Cai, TT, and Low, MG (2005). Nonquadratic estimators of quadratic. The Annals of Statistics, 33 (6), 2930–2956. |
| [36] | Lind, J., and Mehlum, H. (2007). With or Without? The appropriate test for a U-shaped relationship. Munich Personal RePEc Archive (MPRA), 1-13. |
| [37] | De Boor, C. (1978). A Pratical Guide to Spline. Springer-Verlag. |
| [38] | Friedman, JH (1984b). Classification and Multiple Response Regression Through Projection Pursuit, Dept of Statistic, Stanford University. |
| [39] | Silverman, BW (1985). Some Aspects of Spline Smoothing Approach to Non-Parametric Regression Curve Fitting. Journal of the Roy Stat Soc, 1-52. |
| [40] | Partillo, CH, Poirson, H., and Ricci, L. (2011). External Debt and Growth. Revue of Economics and Institutions. |
| [41] | Mandri, B. (2015). Effets seuils de la dette publique sur la croissance économique. Rabat - Agdal: Laboratoire d’Economie Appliquée, Université Mohammed V. |
| [42] | Jarque, CM, and Bera, AK (1984). Testing the Normality Assumption in Limited Dependant Variable Models. International Economic Review. |
| [43] | Dickey, D., and Fuller, W. (1981). Likelihood ratio statistics for autoregressive time series with unit root. Econometrica, 49 (4). |
| [44] | Philips, P., and Perron, P. (1988). Testing for Unit root in Time Series Regression. Biometrika. |
| [45] | Keho, Y. (2004). Impact de l'investissement public sur la croissance en Côte d'Ivoire. Politique Economique et Développement (PED). |
APA Style
Sigue Moussa. (2020). Non-linear Effects of Investment in Road Infrastructure on the Structural Competitiveness of the Economy: The Case of Burkina Faso. International Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Sciences, 8(3), 98-107. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijefm.20200803.12
ACS Style
Sigue Moussa. Non-linear Effects of Investment in Road Infrastructure on the Structural Competitiveness of the Economy: The Case of Burkina Faso. Int. J. Econ. Finance Manag. Sci. 2020, 8(3), 98-107. doi: 10.11648/j.ijefm.20200803.12
AMA Style
Sigue Moussa. Non-linear Effects of Investment in Road Infrastructure on the Structural Competitiveness of the Economy: The Case of Burkina Faso. Int J Econ Finance Manag Sci. 2020;8(3):98-107. doi: 10.11648/j.ijefm.20200803.12
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.ijefm.20200803.12,
author = {Sigue Moussa},
title = {Non-linear Effects of Investment in Road Infrastructure on the Structural Competitiveness of the Economy: The Case of Burkina Faso},
journal = {International Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Sciences},
volume = {8},
number = {3},
pages = {98-107},
doi = {10.11648/j.ijefm.20200803.12},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijefm.20200803.12},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijefm.20200803.12},
abstract = {This article assesses the non-linear effects of investment in road infrastructure on the structural competitiveness of the economy of Burkina Faso. After selecting a period from 1980 to 2015, we estimated two econometric models. These are the quadratic estimation and that of the spline. The results obtained revealed a non-linearity between the structural competitiveness of the economy and investment in road infrastructure. Indeed, the quadratic estimation made it possible to identify a non-linearity in the shape of an inverted U with an optimal threshold of 10.11%. Regarding the spline estimation, it provided an optimal interval of [5%; 15%]. In this interval, a 1% increase in investment in road infrastructure improves structural competitiveness by 0.018%. However, beyond 15%, a 1% increase in investment in road infrastructure leads to a decrease in structural competitiveness by 0.013%. In view of these results, the implication of economic policy that emerges is that in order to benefit from optimal structural competitiveness, the share of investment in road infrastructure in the total investment budget must be between 5% and 15%.},
year = {2020}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Non-linear Effects of Investment in Road Infrastructure on the Structural Competitiveness of the Economy: The Case of Burkina Faso AU - Sigue Moussa Y1 - 2020/06/08 PY - 2020 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijefm.20200803.12 DO - 10.11648/j.ijefm.20200803.12 T2 - International Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Sciences JF - International Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Sciences JO - International Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Sciences SP - 98 EP - 107 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2326-9561 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijefm.20200803.12 AB - This article assesses the non-linear effects of investment in road infrastructure on the structural competitiveness of the economy of Burkina Faso. After selecting a period from 1980 to 2015, we estimated two econometric models. These are the quadratic estimation and that of the spline. The results obtained revealed a non-linearity between the structural competitiveness of the economy and investment in road infrastructure. Indeed, the quadratic estimation made it possible to identify a non-linearity in the shape of an inverted U with an optimal threshold of 10.11%. Regarding the spline estimation, it provided an optimal interval of [5%; 15%]. In this interval, a 1% increase in investment in road infrastructure improves structural competitiveness by 0.018%. However, beyond 15%, a 1% increase in investment in road infrastructure leads to a decrease in structural competitiveness by 0.013%. In view of these results, the implication of economic policy that emerges is that in order to benefit from optimal structural competitiveness, the share of investment in road infrastructure in the total investment budget must be between 5% and 15%. VL - 8 IS - 3 ER -
Information
Email: