K3 - Other Substantive Areas of Law
Other Substantive Areas of Law
Does entrepreneurship cause urban economic growth and if so how large is the impact? Empirical analysis of such question is hampered by endogeneity. This paper uses two different sets of variables – the homestead exemption levels in state bankruptcy laws from 1975 and the share of MSA overlaying aquifers - to instrument for entrepreneurship and examine urban growth between 1993 and 2002. Despite using different sets of instrumental variables, the ranges of 2SLS estimates are similar, further supporting the significant impact of entrepreneurship on urban growth.
This paper examines the impact of government guaranteed small business loans on urban economic growth, and compares the growth impacts of government versus market financed entrepreneurship. OLS estimates indicate a significant and positive relation between the Small Business Administration’s guaranteed loans and metropolitan growth between 1993 and 2002. However, first-difference and instrumental variable regressions show no growth impact from government guaranteed loans. In contrast, market entrepreneurship significantly and positively contributes to local economic growth.
The institutional technologies needed to sustain the rule of law, such as systems of property rights, corporate governance structures and judicial systems, are relatively well-known but most developing countries have proven resistant to the rule of law and good governance in general.
Internationally defined gender rights are glocalized in Peru by both state and non-state actors, especially international non-governmental organizations and trade unions. Looking at four different dimensions of gender disparities shows that the more institutionalized a women’s issue is internationally, the more isomorphic it is nationally. The clear codification on the international level leads to the adoption of an identical provision on the national level without the modification of either the text or the spirit of the agreement.
International migration is maybe the single most effective way to alleviate poverty at a global level. When a given host country allows more immigrants in, this creates costs and benefits for that particular country as well as a positive externality for all those (individuals and governments) who care about world poverty. This implies that the existing international migration regime is inefficient as it fails to internalize such externality. In addition, host countries quite often restrict immigration due to its apparently unbearable social and political costs.