Comparing the reduction of poverty rate between China and Gabon through One Belt and Road Project

Ines Pamela Nguembi,Yanrong Zhang,Haider Salaheldeen Abdalla

doi:10.14254/jems.2020.5-2.9

Ines Pamela Nguembi, Yanrong Zhang + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.14254/jems.2020.5-2.9

Copy DOI

Abstract

The value of economic development and reduction of poverty has been at the forefront of research in many countries. However, little is thought about both China-Gabon. Data were collected employing a survey questionnaire approach to a sample of 210 financial sectors in China and Gabon. The results regarding Gabon show that governance reform can bring significant macro-financial benefits. Additionally, the results proposed that financial development significantly influence poverty reduction. Similarly, the results regarding china show development of the monetary sector significantly and positively impact poverty reduction during which, has been implemented for many years long term. This paper seeks to analyze causality between Gabon. There's an urgent need to enhance administration curb corruption order to increase domestic income, strengthen public management quality expenditure, business environment, promote investment both private sectors

Highlights

The relation between fiscal growth and poverty reduction has provided much literature from both theoretical empirical perspectives in recent years
Drawing on the background of financial growth and poverty reduction, this study aims to compare poverty reduction rates between China and Gabon through One Belt and Road Project
Our study extends the work of Honohan (2004) who found that financial sector development is negatively linked to headcount poverty

Summary

Introduction

The relation between fiscal growth and poverty reduction has provided much literature from both theoretical empirical perspectives in recent years. Research shows by fostering economic process, finance creation may reduce poverty. The view is accordant with a mechanism called “trickle-down.”. Preceding supporting trickle-down effect fines (Funke et al, 2005.). Some primarily used residual-based co-integration regarding (Engle, et al, 1987) (Johansen Juselius 1990) maximum probability checks long-term reduction.

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion