All Categories
    Filters
    Preferences
    Search

    Robert E. Lucas Jr.'s Why doesn't capital flow from rich to poor countries?

    £5.85
    £6.50
    Price-Match is available in-store for recommended titles in CCCU module handbooks
    ISBN: 9781912128433
    Products specifications
    Attribute nameAttribute value
    AuthorBelton, Padraig
    Pub Date05/07/2017
    BindingPaperback
    Pages106
    Publisher: Macat International Limited
    Ship to
    *
    *
    Shipping Method
    Name
    Estimated Delivery
    Price
    No shipping options
    Availability: Available for despatch from the bookshop in 48 hours
    Because the potential returns appear to be greater in poorer countries than in the developed world, modern economic theory implies that rich countries should continually invest in poor countries until returns balance out.

    Robert Lucas is known among economists as one of the most influential macroeconomists of recent times - a reputation founded in no small part on the critical thinking skills displayed in his seminal 1990 paper `Why Doesn't Capital Flow from Rich to Poor Countries?'
    Lucas's paper tackles a puzzle in economic theory that has since come to be known as the `Lucas paradox,' and it deploys the author's brilliant problem solving skills to explain why such an apparent paradox in fact makes sense. Classical economic theory makes a simple prediction of how capital flows between countries: it should, it states, flow from rich to poor countries, because of the law of diminishing returns on capital. Since poor countries have so little capital invested in them, the returns on new investment should be proportionally far better than investment in rich countries.
    This should mean that investors seeking new opportunities will invest in poorer countries, making capital consistently flow from rich nations to poorer ones. But, problematically, this is not in fact the case. Having defined the problem, Lucas did what any good problem solver would: he looked critically at the criteria involved, and offered a series of possible solutions. Indeed, in just six pages, he puts forward four hypotheses to explain the paradox's existence. The popularity of his paper, and the influence it has had, are also greatly magnified by careful reasoning embodied in Lucas's marshalling of evidence and his explanations of the judgements he has made.