Abstract
What are the effects of capital flow shocks on the domestic manufacturing sector? We find that the share of the manufacturing sector output and investment increase in response to positive shocks to the capital flows surge episode. However, the share of the manufacturing sector employment declines and the Gini coefficient increases. Furthermore, a comparison of the sectoral output share responses shows although the share of the manufacturing sector output increases more compared to that of the construction, the wholesale and retail trade, catering and accommodation sectors. Its employment share declines while the share of these two sectors increases. The contrasting sector effects may be because the output growth in the construction, wholesale and retail trade, catering and accommodation sectors tends to be employment intensive. In addition, the manufacturing sector is highly sensitive to exchange rate movements and declines following the exchange rate appreciation shock. This reflects the dominating impact between the expenditure switching effects and the production costs hypothesis. Whereas, the construction sector tends to benefit more from capital flow surges episodes and asset price booms. The policy implications of these results are that a thorough understanding of the channels of transmission of capital flows surge on the different sectors of the economy is important. This will help policy makers to design appropriate policy responses to assist in the sector adjustment to various trade shocks.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Asset prices such as house and equity prices.
References
Artuc, E., Chaudhuri, S., & McLaren, J. (2007). Trade Shocks and Labor Adjustment: A Structural Empirical Approach. NBER Working Paper No. 13465.
Goldberg, P. K., & Pavcnik, N. (2004). Trade, Inequality, and Poverty: What Do We Know? Evidence from Recent Trade Liberalization Episodes in Developing Countries. NBER Working Paper No. 10593.
Goldberg, P. K., & Pavcnik, N. (2007). Distributional Effects of Globalization in Developing Countries. NBER Working Paper No. 12885.
Gumata, N., & Ndou, E. (2017). Labour Market and Fiscal Policy Adjustments to Shocks: The Role and Implications for Price and Financial Stability in South Africa. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-3-319-66519-1.
Gumata, N., & Ndou, E. (2019). Accelerated Land Reform, Mining, Growth, Unemployment and Inequality in South Africa: A Case for Bold Supply Side Policy Interventions. ISBN 978-3-030-30883-4.
Harrison, A., & Hanson, G. H. (1999). Trade Liberalization and Wage Inequality in Mexico. Industrial and Labour Relations Review, 52(2), 271–288.
Harrison, A., McLaren, J., & McMillan, M. S. (2010). Recent Findings on Trade and Inequality. NBER Working Paper No. 16425.
Menezes-Filho, N. A., & Muendler, M-A. (2011). Labor Reallocation in Response to Trade Reform. NBER Working Paper No. 17372.
Topalova, P. (2005). Trade Liberalization, Poverty, and Inequality: Evidence from Indian Districts. NBER Working Paper No. 11614.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gumata, N., Ndou, E. (2020). What Are the Effects of Capital Flow Shocks on the Domestic Manufacturing Sector?. In: The Secular Decline of the South African Manufacturing Sector. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55148-3_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55148-3_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-55147-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-55148-3
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)