政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/131970
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文笔数/总笔数 : 112881/143847 (78%)
造访人次 : 50293316      在线人数 : 726
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜寻范围 查询小技巧：
  • 您可在西文检索词汇前后加上"双引号"，以获取较精准的检索结果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜寻，建议至进阶搜寻限定作者字段，可获得较完整数据
    •  进阶搜寻


    请使用永久网址来引用或连结此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/131970


    题名: 估計脫歐公投對英國經濟的影響:來自合成控制法的證據
    Estimating Brexit-effects on UK’s economic growth: A synthetic control approach
    作者: 羅曼斯
    Roggmann, Matthias
    贡献者: 楊子霆
    Yang, Tzu-Ting
    羅曼斯
    Matthias Roggmann
    关键词: 英國脫歐
    英國
    歐洲聯盟
    合成控制法
    經濟增長
    國內生產總值
    Brexit
    UK
    EU
    Synthetic control method
    Economic growth
    GDP
    日期: 2020
    上传时间: 2020-09-02 13:21:11 (UTC+8)
    摘要: This paper analyzes if the decision by the British electorate to leave the European Union had causal
    effects on the UK’s economic growth, in particular on the UK’s GDP growth rate as well as the growth rate of different economic sectors. By assuming that Brexit fulfils the conditions of a natural experiment, the synthetic control method is applied, which compares the British GDP growth with a weighted average of countries with similar GDP growth over time. Results imply that Brexit
    caused losses in accumulated GDP growth between 5.64% and 8.11% by the end of 2019. A decomposition into individual economic sectors could show, that this output gap is largely caused by a 21.45% loss within the financial and insurance activities. The results hold valid for several
    sensitivity and robustness checks and are in accordance with economic theory as well as previous empirical findings. Thereby, this paper contributes to the academic literature by quantifying post-Brexit effects for the British economy and by delivering further evidence about the disadvantages of leaving international trade agreements.
    參考文獻: Abadie, A., Diamond, A., and Hainmueller, J. (2010). Synthetic control methods for comparative case studies: Estimating the effect of California’s tobacco control program. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 105(490):493–505.
    Abadie, A., Diamond, A., and Hainmueller, J. (2011). Synth: An R package for synthetic control methods in comparative case studies. Journal of Statistical Software, 42(13).
    Abadie, A., Diamond, A., and Hainmueller, J. (2015). Comparative politics and the synthetic control method. American Journal of Political Science, 59(2):495–510.
    Abadie, A. and Gardeazabal, J. (2003). The economic costs of conflict: A case study of the Basque Country. American Economic Review, 93(1):113–132.
    Becker, S. O., Fetzer, T., and Novy, D. (2017). Who voted for Brexit? A comprehensive districtlevel analysis. Economic Policy, 32(92):601–650.
    Belke, A., Dubova, I., and Osowski, T. (2018). Policy uncertainty and international financial markets: The case of Brexit. Applied Economics, 50(34-35):3752–3770.
    Bertelsmann Stiftung (2015). Costs and benefits of a United Kingdom exit from the European Union.
    Bhambra, G. K. (2017). Brexit, Trump, and ‘methodological whiteness’: On the misrecognition of race and class. The British Journal of Sociology, 68:214–232.
    Bloom, N. (2009). The impact of uncertainty shocks. Econometrica, 77(3):623–685.
    Born, B., M¨uller, G. J., Schularick, M., and Sedl´aˇcek, P. (2019). The costs of economic nationalism:
    Evidence from the Brexit experiment. The Economic Journal, 129(623):2722–2744.
    Botosaru, I. and Ferman, B. (2019). On the role of covariates in the synthetic control method. The
    Econometrics Journal, 22(2):117–130.
    Bouoiyour, J. and Selmi, R. (2018). Are UK industries resilient in dealing with uncertainty? The case of Brexit. The European Journal of Comparative Economics, 15(2):277–292.
    Breinlich, H., Leromain, E., Novy, D., and Sampson, T. (2020). Voting with their money: Brexit and outward investment by UK firms. European Economic Review, 124:103400.
    Campos, N. F., Coricelli, F., and Moretti, L. (2014). Economic growth and political integration:
    Estimating the benefits from membership in the European Union using the synthetic counterfactuals method. IZA Discussion Paper, No. 8162.
    DiNardo, J. (2010). Natural experiments and quasi-natural experiments. In Microeconometrics, pages 139–153. Springer.
    Douch, M., Edwards, T. H., and Soegaard, C. (2018). The trade effects of the Brexit announcement shock. Warwick Economics Research Papers, 1176.

    Fetzer, T. (2019). Did austerity cause Brexit? American Economic Review, 109(11):3849–86.
    Greater London Authority (2018). EU Referendum Results. Online available at:
    https://data.gov.uk/dataset/be2f2aec-11d8-4bfe-9800-649e5b8ec044/eu-referendum-results.
    (accessed: 2020/06/03).
    HM Government (2016). HM treasury analysis: The long-term economic impact of EU membership and the alternatives.
    Hughes, C. (2019). It’s the EU immigrants stupid! UKIP’s core-issue and populist rhetoric on the road to Brexit. European Journal of Communication, 34(3):248–266.
    IMF (2016). United Kingdom. Selected issues. IMF Country Report No. 16/169.
    Inglehart, R. F. and Norris, P. (2016). Trump, Brexit, and the rise of populism: Economic have-nots and cultural backlash. HKS Working Paper No. RWP16-026.
    Kaul, A., Kl¨oßner, S., Pfeifer, G., and Schieler, M. (2015). Synthetic control methods: Never use all pre-intervention outcomes together with covariates. Munich Personal RePEc Archive.
    Leyland, C. (2019). Old words, new words, EU words: Brexit and the OED. Online available at:
    https://public.oed.com/blog/brexit-and-the-oed/. (accessed: 2020/06/03).
    McClelland, R. and Gault, S. (2017). The synthetic control method as a tool to understand state policy. Washington, DC: Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.
    Minford, P. (2016). Brexit and trade: What are the options? The Economy after Brexit, pages 13–15.
    OECD (2016). The consequences of Brexit: A taxing decision. OECD Economic Policy Paper No. 16.
    Oxford Economics (2016). Assessing the economic implications of Brexit.
    PwC (2016). Leaving the EU: Implications for the UK economy.
    Saia, A. (2017). Choosing the open sea: The cost to the UK of staying out of the Euro. Journal of International Economics, 108:82–98.
    Serwicka, I. and Tamberi, N. (2018). Not backing Britain: FDI inflows since the Brexit referendum. UK Trade Policy Observatory Briefing Paper, 23.
    Welfens, P. J. (2017). An accidental Brexit: New EU and transatlantic economic perspectives. Springer.
    描述: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    應用經濟與社會發展英語碩士學位學程(IMES)
    107266008
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107266008
    数据类型: thesis
    DOI: 10.6814/NCCU202001491
    显示于类别:[應用經濟與社會發展英語碩士學位學程 (IMES)] 學位論文

    文件中的档案:

    没有与此文件相关的档案.



    在政大典藏中所有的数据项都受到原著作权保护.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回馈