FINANCIAL SECTOR DEVELOPMENT AND ECONOMIC GROWTH IN SSA: INSIGHTS WITH NEW DATA

Abstract

Research on the impact of financial development on economic growth remains inconclusive. Previous empirical examination of the link is based on aggregate GDP on the presumption that each economic sector responds identically to financial development. However, the extent of credit utilisation, as well as productivity of credit, may not necessarily remain the same across sectors. This study therefore seeks to contribute to the literature by examining the effect of financial development across sectors in sub-Saharan Africa using the Generalised Method of Moments (GMM) over the period 1990–2018. Indeed, the findings show that while financial development has a positive effect on the service and agricultural sectors, a certain threshold of financial development must be reached before it can positively contribute to the growth of the industrial sector. The findings are robust to a different estimation technique. With the industrial sector considered critical for economic transformation, our findings imply that policymakers in sub-Saharan Africa need to continue to promote financial development to spur industrialization.

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Background of the study

The debate about the significance of the financial sector to economic growth has been on-going for decades. In recent times, the interlinkages between financial sector development, poverty alleviation and economic growth provide compelling reasons why the financial sector is essential to developing countries especially those in sub – Saharan Africa. Mu, Phelps and Stosky (2013) found that deeper financial markets are beneficial to growth as the development of these markets improve financial intermediation and enable economic stability in the sub-region. Furthermore, the increase in funds and an improvement in the efficiency of the financial sector in SSA is reported as good for sustainable growth (Mlachila, Cui, Jidoud, Newaik, Radzewicz-Bak, Takebe, Ye & Zhang, 2016).

RELATED PROJECT  THE EFFECTS OF PRIVATIZATION AND COMMERCIALIZATION POLICY ON NATIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Inasmuch as there is extant literature documenting the relationship between the financial sector and economic growth, it is crucial to revisit the nexus because the widely used proxies to measure financial sector development either use the depth of a financial sub-sector or monetary aggregates. Due to unavailability of data, previous studies have used measures that represent a component of the financial system (Levine, 2003). The financial depth variables include liquid liabilities to gross domestic product, domestic credit to the private sector and stock market capitalisation while the monetary aggregates include broad and narrow money.

The problem is that these proxies do not reflect the financial intermediary role of financial institutions and markets which is the essential feature of the finance-growth nexus debate (De Gregorio & Guidotti, 1995) and may not provide a holistic picture of the financial sector. Von

Furstenberg and Fratianni (1996) argued that there is no consensus on the type of indicators for financial development. Cihak, Demirguc-Kunt, Feyen and Levine (2013) also pointed out that the empirical measurement of the financial sector development is quite challenging thus the use of the different dimensions as the basis of reporting on the level of financial development. This argument thus provides an insight into the need for a proxy that encapsulates all financial institutions and markets.

Svirydzenka (2016) introduced financial development indices that capture the depth, access and efficiency dimensions of the financial sector which this study adopts. First, it is essential to clarify that financial development is used synonymously with financial sector development in this study. The concept is also based on the definition of Sahay et al. (2015) which referred to financial development as a “combination of depth, access, and efficiency”. Conceptually, this definition reflects the multidimensionality of financial intermediaries.

Review of literature

Extensive theoretical and empirical literature on the impact of financial development on economic growth exists (Murari, 2017). Chuah and Thai (2004) identified four main lines of argument in the theoretical literature on the relationship between finance and growth. The first line of argument led by Schumpeter (1934) asserted that finance has a positive impact on growth by financing innovative ideas. McKinnon (1973) and Shaw (1973) developed a framework within which the financial sector increases growth by raising savings and investment. To achieve this,
they called for liberalisation of interest rates and, as the real interest rate increases, the incentive to save also increases. Gurley and Shaw (1955) highlighted the role of financial institutions in directing surplus units to deficit units to promote growth.
Bencivenga and Smith (1991) developed an endogenous equilibrium model in which the role of the bank is central in financial intermediation. They argued that financial intermediation affects growth through investment, where banks mobilise and direct savings into productive investment. King and Levine (1993) complemented this argument by explaining the role of finance in growth through an endogenous growth model. They argued that financial institutions help growth by screening potential projects of entrepreneurs and, through financial intermediation, mobilise finance to support the most productive economic activities and diversifying the risk associated with these economic activities.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *