Paul Mosley

Bio: Paul Mosley is an academic researcher from University of Sheffield. The author has contributed to research in topics: Poverty & Microfinance. The author has an hindex of 42, co-authored 182 publications receiving 8093 citations. Previous affiliations of Paul Mosley include Pennsylvania State University & University of Manchester.

Finance Against Poverty

Abstract: Over the last decade, the theory that poverty in the world's poorest regions could be alleviated by providing small loans to micro-entrepreneurs has become increasingly popular. This volume examines the effectiveness of this theory when put into practice. The book presents empirical evidence drawn from comparative experiences in seven developing countries and produces some startling conclusions. This work should be essential reading for all those interested in development, poverty-reduction, social welfare and finance. Volume One provides a detailed analysis of this theory and offers policy recommendations for practitioners in the field.

Aid and power: The World Bank and policy-based lending

Abstract: When the major aid organizations made flows of aid conditional on changes in policy, they prompted an extensive debate in development circles. Aid and Power has made one of the most significant and influential contributions to that debate. This edition has been revised to take account of changes within the World Bank itself and the extension of policy based lending to the formerly socialist economies of east and central Europe.

Aid, the Public Sector and the Market in Less Developed Countries

Abstract: The article in this JOURNAL by Mosley et al. (I987) concludes its analysis of aid effectiveness as demonstrating '... inability of development aid over more than twenty years to provide a net increment to overall growth in the Third World' (p. 636). This note purports to show that this conclusion, which is ostensibly 'distressing' as the authors claim, is not warranted. The section of the study which is the basis of the conclusion cited and the subject of this note is a cross-section regression analysis, full details of which are shown in Mosley et al. Table 3. The note is concerned with the relation between the dependent variable specified as the growth rate of real GDP per cent per annum (hereafter GDP) and aid specified as a percentage of GDP (hereafter Aid).' The Aid results, with only two significant positive coefficients in one subsample, certainly give no basis for claiming aid-effectiveness in terms of GDP growth. The intention in this note is to interpret the results which are assumed to be valid. This is made possible by the fact that the authors have helpfully provided the full input set of mean values derived from the raw data. From this it is possible to calculate the GDP/Aid relationship for each country for the second and third period. The procedure for deriving these relationships is as follows. For each country the mean values of the time series of GDP and Aid are extracted from the data for I 960-70 and for I 970-80. Using I 960-70 as the base, the signs of the change in the levels of the GDP and Aid mean values between periods are recorded. This is repeated for I980-4 with I970-80 mean values as the base. The relationship between the two signs is an indication of the effect of Aid on GDP in the period in which the change in levels is effected. Thus in the case of an increase in Aid being combined with a decrease in GDP the latter must have fallen relatively to the former and aid-effectiveness is negative; Mutatis mutandis, for the other three sign combinations, thus generating the appropriate GDP/Aid relationship for each country in each period. A frequency distribution of the four sign-combinations, relating to the full sample, is presented in Table I. Since the signs of the changes in the levels of GDP and Aid are derived by making explicit the arithmetic relationship implicit in the data they form a valid base from which to draw conclusions without requiring any test of

Aid, Poverty Reduction and the ‘New Conditionality’*

Abstract: The paper examines the effect of aid on poverty, rather than on economic growth. We devise a ‘pro-poor (public) expenditure index’, and present evidence that, together with inequality and corruption, this is a key determinant of the aid's poverty leverage. After presenting empirical evidence which suggests a positive leverage of aid donors on pro-poor expenditure, we argue for the development of conditionality in a new form, which gives greater flexibility to donors in punishing slippage on previous commitments, and keys aid disbursements to performance in respect of policy variables which governments can influence in a pro-poor direction.

The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking Ahead

Abstract: This paper examines the progressive development of the new institutional economics over the past quarter century. It begins by distinguishing four levels of social analysis, with special emphasis on the institutional environment and the institutions of governance. It then turns to some of the good ideas out of which the NIE works: the description of human actors, feasibility, firms as governance structures, and operationalization. Applications, including privatization, are briefly discussed. Its empirical successes, public policy applications, and other accomplishments notwithstanding, there is a vast amount of unfinished business.

Economic growth and income inequality

Abstract: We investigate whether income inequality affects subsequent growth in a cross-country sample for 1965-90, using the models of Barro (1997), Bleaney and Nishiyama (2002) and Sachs and Warner (1997), with negative results. We then investigate the evolution of income inequality over the same period and its correlation with growth. The dominating feature is inequality convergence across countries. This convergence has been significantly faster amongst developed countries. Growth does not appear to influence the evolution of inequality over time. Outline