Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

This paper applies the Growth Identification and Facilitation Framework developed by Lin and Monga (2010) to Nigeria. It identifies as appropriate comparator countries China, India, Indonesia, and Vietnam, and selects a wide range of industries in which these comparator countries may be losing their comparative advantage and which may therefore lend themselves to targeted interventions of the government to fast-track growth. These industries include food processing, light manufacturing, suitcases, shoes, car parts, and petrochemicals. The paper also discusses binding constraints to growth in each of these value chains as well as mechanisms through which governance-related issues in the implementation of industrial policy could be addressed.

E-Business --- Economic Theory & Research --- Employment intensity --- Environmental Economics & Policies --- Facilitation framework --- Growth identification --- Growth performance --- Labor Policies --- Macroeconomics and Economic Growth --- Technological innovation --- Transport Economics Policy & Planning

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

The poor state of Cameroon's infrastructure is a key bottleneck to the nation's economic growth. From 2000 to 2005, improvements in information and communications technology (ICT) boosted Cameroon's growth performance by 1.26 percentage points per capita, while deficient power infrastructure held growth back by 0.28 points per capita. If Cameroon could improve its infrastructure to the level of Africa's middle-income countries, it could raise its per capita economic growth rate by about 3.3 percentage points. Cameroon has made significant progress in many aspects of infrastructure, implementing institutional reforms across a broad range of sectors with a view to attracting private-sector participation and finance, which has generally led to performance improvements. But the country still faces a number of important infrastructure challenges, including poor road quality, expensive and unreliable electricity, and a stagnating and uncompetitive ICT sector. Cameroon currently spends around USD 930 million per year on infrastructure, with USD 586 million lost to inefficiencies. Removing those inefficiencies would leave an infrastructure funding gap of USD 350 million per year. Given Cameroon's relatively strong economy and natural-resource base, as well as its success in attracting private financing, the country should be able to close that gap and meet its infrastructure goals within 13 years.

Banks & Banking Reform --- Energy Production and Transportation --- Growth performance --- Information and communications technology --- Infrastructure Economics --- Infrastructure Economics and Finance --- Macroeconomics and Economic Growth --- Per capita economic growth --- Performance improvements --- Road quality --- Town Water Supply and Sanitation --- Transport Economics Policy & Planning

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Infrastructure contributed 1 percentage point to Senegal's improved per capita growth performance between 2000 and 2005, placing it in the middle of the distribution among West African countries. Raising the country's infrastructure endowment to that of the region's middle-income countries (MICs) could boost annual growth by about 2.7 percentage points. Senegal has made significant progress in some areas of its infrastructure, including the transport, electricity, water, and information-and-communication-technology (ICT) sectors. But looking ahead, the country faces important infrastructure challenges, including improving road conditions, boosting air and rail traffic, updating electricity infrastructure, and boosting the pace of expansion of the water-and-sanitation network. Senegal currently spends around USD 911 million per year on infrastructure, with USD 312 million lost annually to inefficiencies. Comparing spending needs with existing spending and potential efficiency gains leaves an annual funding gap of USD 578 million per year. Senegal has the potential close this gap by bringing in more private-sector investment.

E-Business --- Electricity infrastructure --- Information and communication technology --- Infrastructure Economics --- Infrastructure Economics and Finance --- Macroeconomics and Economic Growth --- Middle-income countries --- Per capita growth performance --- Public Sector Economics --- Roads & Highways --- Transport Economics Policy & Planning --- Water and sanitation network

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

The poor state of Cameroon's infrastructure is a key bottleneck to the nation's economic growth. From 2000 to 2005, improvements in information and communications technology (ICT) boosted Cameroon's growth performance by 1.26 percentage points per capita, while deficient power infrastructure held growth back by 0.28 points per capita. If Cameroon could improve its infrastructure to the level of Africa's middle-income countries, it could raise its per capita economic growth rate by about 3.3 percentage points. Cameroon has made significant progress in many aspects of infrastructure, implementing institutional reforms across a broad range of sectors with a view to attracting private-sector participation and finance, which has generally led to performance improvements. But the country still faces a number of important infrastructure challenges, including poor road quality, expensive and unreliable electricity, and a stagnating and uncompetitive ICT sector. Cameroon currently spends around USD 930 million per year on infrastructure, with USD 586 million lost to inefficiencies. Removing those inefficiencies would leave an infrastructure funding gap of USD 350 million per year. Given Cameroon's relatively strong economy and natural-resource base, as well as its success in attracting private financing, the country should be able to close that gap and meet its infrastructure goals within 13 years.

Banks & Banking Reform --- Energy Production and Transportation --- Growth performance --- Information and communications technology --- Infrastructure Economics --- Infrastructure Economics and Finance --- Macroeconomics and Economic Growth --- Per capita economic growth --- Performance improvements --- Road quality --- Town Water Supply and Sanitation --- Transport Economics Policy & Planning

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Low and highly volatile growth define Africa's growth experience. But there is no evidence that growth volatility is associated to long term economic performance. This result may be misleading if it suggests that volatility is not important for economic and social progress. In this paper we use a variant of the method developed by Hausmann, Pritchett, and Rodrik (2005) to identify both growth acceleration and deceleration episodes in Africa between 1975 and 2005. The authors find that Africa has had numerous growth acceleration episodes in the last 30 years, but also nearly a comparable number of growth collapses, offsetting most of the benefits of growth. Had Africa avoided its growth collapses, it would have grown 1.7 percent a year instead of 0.7 percent, and its GDP per capita would have been more than 30 percent higher in 2005. The authors also find that growth accelerations and decelerations have an asymmetric impact on human development outcomes. Finally, our results suggest that it is easier to identify the likely institutional and policy origins of growth decelerations than of growth accelerations.

Country Data --- Economic Conditions --- Economic Conditions and Volatility --- Economic Growth --- Economic Performance --- Governance --- Governance Indicators --- Growth Performance --- Growth Rate --- Growth Rates --- Health, Nutrition and Population --- Human Development --- Macroeconomics and Economic Growth --- Nutrition --- Per Capita Income --- Poverty Reduction --- Pro-Poor Growth --- Public Policy --- Social Outcomes