Abstract

Prioritizing the growth of particular sectors or regions is often part of a low income country's growth strategy. We study a prototypical example of such policies in Ethiopia, exploiting geographic and sectoral variation in the form and scale of the policy for identification. Using product-level data on Ethiopian manufacturing firms we show that the policy was unsuccessful: in the best case scenario its benefits were around one tenth of its cost. Subsidised loans did not improve productivity, leading only to an increase in fungible assets not machinery. Tax-breaks improved productivity but reduced firms' capital levels. Further results suggest these both were the consequence of volatility and the lack of effective bankruptcy protection.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call