EuroEconomica, Vol 38, No 2 (2019)

An Equilibrium Model with Applications for Some of the Asian and Australia-Oceania Countries - Part One

 

Cătălin Angelo Ioan[1], Gina Ioan[2]

 

Abstract: The model presented in this article is an adaptation of the IS-LM model for an open economy in which we took into account the temporal variable to more accurately determine the equilibrium levels of the macroeconomic indicators. We analyzed the periods during which the values of the indicators exceeded the level of equilibrium and we identified the possible causes that led to these situations.

Keywords: equilibrium; GDP; investments; interest rate; consumption

JEL Classification: E17; E27

 

1. The Model Equations ([1])

The first equation of the model is the formula of the aggregate demand:

(1)              D(t)=C(t)+G(t)+I(t)+EX(t)-IM(t)

where:

·        D(t) – the aggregate demand at the moment t;

·        C(t) – the actual final consumption of households at the moment t;

·        G(t) – the actual final consumption of the government at the moment t;

·        I(t) – the investment at the moment t;

·        EX(t) – the exports at the moment t;

·        IM(t) – the imports at the moment t

A second equation relates the actual final consumption of households according to disposable income:

(2)       C(t)=cVDI(t)+C0, C0ÎR, cV>0

where:

·        DI(t) – the disposable income at the moment t;

·        cV – the marginal propensity to consume, cV= >0;

·        C0the intrinsic achieved autonomous consumption of households

  (3)       G(t)=iGTI(t)+G0, iGÎ(0,1)

where:

·        TI(t) – the total income at the moment t;

·        iG – the marginal index of final consumption of the government according to total income

·        G0 - the intrinsic achieved autonomous consumption of government

  (4)       TI(t)=TR(t)+OR(t)

where:

·        TR(t) – tax rate at the moment t;

·        OR(t) – other revenues at the moment t

  (5)       OR(t)=iORY(t)+OR0, iORÎ(0,1), OR0ÎR

where:

·        Y(t) – the output at the moment t;

·        iOR – the marginal index of other revenues according to the output;

·        OR0 – the autonomous other revenues

  (6)       I(t)=iYY(t)+irr(t)+I0, iYÎ(0,1), ir<0

where:

·        I(t) – investments at the moment t;

·        r(t) – the real interest rate at the moment t;

·        iY – the rate of investments;

·        ir – a factor of influence on the investment rate

·        I0 - the autonomous investments

  (7)       DI(t)=Y(t)+TF(t)-TR(t)

  (8)       TF(t)=cTFY(t)+TF0, cTFÎ(0,1), TF0ÎR

where:

·        TF(t) – the government transfers at the moment t;

·        cTFthe marginal index of government transfers according to the output;

·        TF0 – the autonomous government transfers

  (9)       TR(t)=tYY(t)+TR0, tYÎ(0,1), TR0ÎR

where:

·        tYthe marginal index of tax rate according to the output;

·        TR0 – the intercept of the regression

(10)     IM(t)=imYY(t)+IM0, imY>0, IM0ÎR

where:

·        CH(t) – the exchange rate of the national currency based on the euro at the moment t;

·        imYthe rate of imports;

·        IM0 – the autonomous imports

(11)     EX(t)=exYY(t)+EX0, exY>0, EX0ÎR

where:

·        exYthe rate of exports;

·        EX0 – the autonomous exports

(12)     D(t)=Y(t) – the equation of equilibrium at the moment t

(13)     MD(t)=mdYY(t)+mdrr(t)+MD0, mdYÎ(0,1), mdr<0

where:

·        MD(t) – the money demand in the economy at the moment t;

·        mdY – the rate of money demand in the economy;

·        mdr – a factor of influencing the demand for currency from the interest rate

·        MD0 - the autonomous money demand

(14)     MS(t)=mSt+MS0, mM,M0ÎR

where:

·        MS(t) – the money supply in the economy at the moment t;

·        mS – the marginal index of the money supply according to time;

·        MS0 – the intercept of the regression

(15)     MD(t)=MS(t) – the equation of equilibrium at the moment t

 

2. The Equilibrium at a Fixed Moment ([1])

From (4), (5), (11) we get:

   (16)     TI(t)=(tY+iOR)Y(t)+TR0+OR0

From (3), (16):

   (17)     G(t)=(iGtY+iGiOR)Y(t)+iG(TR0+OR0)+G0

From (7), (8), (9) we get:

   (18)     DI(t)=(1+cTF-tY)Y(t)+TF0-TR0

From (2), (18):

   (19)     C(t)=(cV+cVcTF-cVtY)Y(t)+cV(TF0-TR0)+C0

Now, from (1), (6), (10), (11), (17), (19) we have:

   (20)     D(t)=(cV+cVcTF-cVtY+iGtY+iGiOR+iY+exY-imY)Y(t)+irr(t)+cV(TF0-TR0)+iG(TR0+OR0)+C0+G0+ I0+EX0-IM0

From (12) and (20) we get the first equation of the equilibrium:

   (21)     (cV+cVcTF-cVtY+iGtY+iGiOR+iY+exY-imY-1)Y(t)+irr(t)+cV(TF0-TR0)+iG(TR0+OR0)+C0+G0+ I0+EX0-IM0=0

and from (13), (14), (15) we get the second equation of the equilibrium

   (22)     mdYY(t)+mdrr(t)-mSt+MD0-MS0=0

Let note now:

   (23)     a=cV+cVcTF-cVtY+iGtY+iGiOR+iY+exY-imY-1

   (24)     b=cV(TF0-TR0)+iG(TR0+OR0)+C0+G0+I0+EX0-IM0

   (25)     g=MD0-MS0

The equilibrium equations become:

   (26)    

The solutions of equilibrium are:

   (27)    

At equilibrium, replacing (27) in (1)-(16), we have:

   (28)     TI*(t)=(tY+iOR)Y*(t)+TR0+OR0=

   (29)     G*(t)=

   (30)     DI*(t)=

   (31)     C*(t)=

   (32)     OR*(t)=

   (33)     TR*(t)=

   (34)     TF*(t)=

   (35)     I*(t)=

   (36)     IM*(t)=

   (37)     EX*(t)=

   (38)     MD*(t)=

   (39)     MS*(t)=mSt+MS0

 

3. Analysis of the Countries

3.1. Afghanistan

After the analysis during 2002-2016 the model equations are:

(40)         D(t)=C(t)+G(t)+I(t)+EX(t)-IM(t)

(41)         C(t)=1.0748DI(t)-492806926

(42)         G(t)=1.8158TI(t)-576163364

(43)         TI(t)=TR(t)+OR(t)

(44)         OR(t)=0.0273Y(t)-93080272

(45)         I(t)=0.3447Y(t)+1838840r(t)-2403484225

(46)         DI(t)=Y(t)+TF(t)-TR(t)

(47)         TF(t)=0.1104Y(t)-698654042

(48)         TR(t)=0.0857Y(t)-178851965

(49)         IM(t)=0.5074Y(t)+414651459

(50)         EX(t)=-0.1144Y(t)+3987610671

(51)         D(t)=Y(t)

(52)         MD(t)=0.4111Y(t)+5663634r(t)-1773123228

(53)         MS(t)=411040302t-821378571504

(54)         MD(t)=MS(t)

Solving the equations (1)-(15) we find that at equilibrium (t” being the year):

   (55)     Y(t)=1283813128.95t-2569053265936.47

   (56)     r(t)=-20.6029t+41746.4349

   (57)     TI(t)=145117695.46t-290668627095.69

   (58)     G(t)=263498073.55t-528358960893.03

   (59)     DI(t)=1315480409.57t-2632942828665.53

   (60)     C(t)=1413929116.07t-2830481379387.97

   (61)     OR(t)=35043998.65t-70220030330.63

   (62)     TR(t)=110073696.81t-220448596765.06

   (63)     TF(t)=141740977.43t-284338159494.12

   (64)     I(t)=404689862.68t-811281077285.17

   (65)     IM(t)=651451628.55t-1303212719357.82

   (66)     EX(t)=-146852294.79t+297855432271.89

   (67)     MD(t)=MS(t)=411040301.76t-821378571504.21

From the relationships (16)-(28) we can draw the following conclusions:

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of households” was registered in 2002 (4656.22%) and the minimum in 2008 (113.50%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 47.76-78.49%.

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of the government” emphasizes that in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of the government” was registered in 2006 (451.23%) and the minimum in 2015 (119.93%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 7.43-15.95%.

The analysis of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Other revenues” was registered in 2006 (260.26%) and the minimum in 2014 (101.93%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 1.36-2.26%.

The analysis of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2016 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Investment” was registered in 2012 (152.18%) and the minimum in 2015 (110.52%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 15.75-23.95%.

The analysis of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Government transfers” was registered in 2007 (474.37%) and the minimum in 2006 (-13251.58%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 3.21-7.08%.

The analysis of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Tax revenue” was registered in 2006 (197.46%) and the minimum in 2015 (117.05%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 4.17-7.51%.

The analysis of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2009 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2016 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Broad money” was registered in 2014 (107.00%) and the minimum in 2008 (84.21%).

The analysis of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Exports” was registered in 2016 (109.25%) and the minimum in 2011 (52.70%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 0.00-0.00%.

The analysis of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2009 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Imports” was registered in 2002 (581.66%) and the minimum in 2008 (69.54%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 25.67-47.58%.

The analysis of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2006, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2008 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Trade balance” was registered in 2006 (672.31%) and the minimum in 2005 (-1111.27%).

The analysis of “Output” emphasizes that in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 is above the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Output” emphasizes that in 2010 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Output” was registered in 2002 (1064.73%) and the minimum in 2010 (187.66%).

The analysis of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2002, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2010 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Real interest rate (%)” was registered in 2008 (3.81%) and the minimum in 2006 (1.48%).

Figure 3.1.1.

Figure 3.1.2.

Figure 3.1.3.

Figure 3.1.4.

Figure 3.1.5.

Figure 3.1.6.

Figure 3.1.7.

Figure 3.1.8.

Figure 3.1.9.

Figure 3.1.10.

Figure 3.1.11.

Figure 3.1.12.

Figure 3.1.13.

3.2. Armenia

After the analysis during 2000-2016 the model equations are:

   (68)     D(t)=C(t)+G(t)+I(t)+EX(t)-IM(t)

   (69)     C(t)=0.5817DI(t)+1463247125

   (70)     G(t)=0.1055TI(t)+863076556

   (71)     TI(t)=TR(t)+OR(t)

   (72)     OR(t)=-0.0145Y(t)+550074807

   (73)     I(t)=0.1861Y(t)-69949429r(t)+1911374551

   (74)     DI(t)=Y(t)+TF(t)-TR(t)

   (75)     TF(t)=0.2822Y(t)-1021125219

   (76)     TR(t)=0.2069Y(t)-482220841

   (77)     IM(t)=0.2318Y(t)+1476598789

   (78)     EX(t)=0.2156Y(t)+146860092

   (79)     D(t)=Y(t)

   (80)     MD(t)=0.5075Y(t)+82713892r(t)-3859131667

   (81)     MS(t)=196334736t-392443864996

   (82)     MD(t)=MS(t)

Solving the equations (1)-(15) we find that at equilibrium (t” being the year):

   (83)     Y(t)=678411999.69t-1353339797802.37

   (84)     r(t)=-1.7887t+3605.3649

   (85)     TI(t)=130518962.17t-260299748539.86

   (86)     G(t)=13767098.58t-26593258055.86

   (87)     DI(t)=729461051.49t-1455714627060.62

   (88)     C(t)=424312756.56t-845296542052.49

   (89)     OR(t)=-9869665.20t+20238716386.68

   (90)     TR(t)=140388627.37t-280538464926.54

   (91)     TF(t)=191437679.17t-382913294184.79

   (92)     I(t)=251345690.62t-502090787555.53

   (93)     IM(t)=157274830.42t-312265326907.00

   (94)     EX(t)=146261284.35t-291624537045.48

   (95)     MD(t)=MS(t)=196334735.99t-392443864995.80

From the relationships (16)-(28) we can draw the following conclusions:

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2008 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of households” was registered in 2000 (123.78%) and the minimum in 2016 (77.74%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 73.26-95.59%.

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of the government” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of the government” was registered in 2015 (117.14%) and the minimum in 2004 (67.52%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 11.88-16.79%.

The analysis of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2004, 2005, 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Other revenues” was registered in 2012 (139.31%) and the minimum in 2004 (61.53%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 5.03-8.78%.

The analysis of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 is above the equilibrium value and in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009 is above the equilibrium value and in 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Investment” was registered in 2008 (171.53%) and the minimum in 2016 (50.07%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 20.64-42.44%.

The analysis of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010 is above the equilibrium value and in 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Government transfers” was registered in 2008 (165.15%) and the minimum in 2000 (-317.39%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 17.07-25.87%.

The analysis of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Tax revenue” was registered in 2008 (134.24%) and the minimum in 2011 (93.63%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 21.86-27.15%.

The analysis of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2007, 2008, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2008 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Broad money” was registered in 2000 (240.37%) and the minimum in 2010 (68.24%).

The analysis of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Exports” was registered in 2003 (145.14%) and the minimum in 2009 (67.02%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 19.59-31.83%.

The analysis of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2010 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Imports” was registered in 2008 (132.80%) and the minimum in 2015 (71.49%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 42.25-54.58%.

The analysis of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Trade balance” was registered in 2008 (201.02%) and the minimum in 2016 (6.34%).

The analysis of “Output” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Output” emphasizes that in 2008 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Output” was registered in 2000 (123.72%) and the minimum in 2016 (80.22%).

The analysis of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2000, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Real interest rate (%)” was registered in 2015 (1375.03%) and the minimum in 2016 (-2737.82%).

Figure 3.2.1

Figure 3.2.2.

Figure 3.2.3.

Figure 3.2.4.

Figure 3.2.5.

Figure 3.2.6.

Figure 3.2.7.

Figure 3.2.8.

Figure 3.2.9.

Figure 3.2.10.

Figure 3.2.11.

Figure 3.2.12.

Figure 3.2.13.

 

3.3. Australia

After the analysis during 2000-2016 the model equations are:

   (96)     D(t)=C(t)+G(t)+I(t)+EX(t)-IM(t)

   (97)     C(t)=0.5570DI(t)+16625510251

   (98)     G(t)=0.9429TI(t)-68758737577

   (99)     TI(t)=TR(t)+OR(t)

  (100)    OR(t)=0.0257Y(t)-1581204353

  (101)    I(t)=0.4178Y(t)-2579298141r(t)-156989354523

  (102)    DI(t)=Y(t)+TF(t)-TR(t)

  (103)    TF(t)=0.1435Y(t)+58884314908

  (104)    TR(t)=0.1641Y(t)+70113595293

  (105)    IM(t)=0.4080Y(t)-235483208500

  (106)    EX(t)=0.2299Y(t)-33869145253

  (107)    D(t)=Y(t)

  (108)    MD(t)=2.0706Y(t)-1773149857r(t)-1257165675421

  (109)    MS(t)=64719242816t-128969961498168

  (110)    MD(t)=MS(t)

Solving the equations (1)-(15) we find that at equilibrium (t” being the year):

  (111)    Y(t)=30890560082.75t-60940760763902.60

  (112)    r(t)=-0.4279t+863.9320

  (113)    TI(t)=5863552205.65t-11499057553491.10

  (114)    G(t)=5528488239.93t-10910719757988.50

  (115)    DI(t)=30254502391.19t-59697178234172.30

  (116)    C(t)=16852635631.93t-33236434812018.10

  (117)    OR(t)=794262453.49t-1568498671443.41

  (118)    TR(t)=5069289752.16t-9930558882047.69

  (119)    TF(t)=4433232060.61t-8686976352317.41

  (120)    I(t)=14009652122.94t-27846021963178.90

  (121)    IM(t)=12602325885.37t-25097296163384.60

  (122)    EX(t)=7102109973.31t-14044880394101.60

  (123)    MD(t)=MS(t)=64719242815.68t-128969961498168.00

From the relationships (16)-(28) we can draw the following conclusions:

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2011 is above the equilibrium value and in 2010, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of households” was registered in 2008 (103.21%) and the minimum in 2002 (98.36%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 55.24-56.62%.

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of the government” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of the government” was registered in 2012 (106.03%) and the minimum in 2003 (94.31%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 17.72-18.59%.

The analysis of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2000, 2002, 2010, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2010 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Other revenues” was registered in 2000 (121.15%) and the minimum in 2005 (92.05%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 2.47-2.86%.

The analysis of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2000, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 is above the equilibrium value and in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Investment” was registered in 2000 (109.02%) and the minimum in 2016 (86.10%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 22.30-30.37%.

The analysis of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2008 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Government transfers” was registered in 2016 (109.12%) and the minimum in 2011 (83.31%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 19.46-22.20%.

The analysis of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2002, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2008 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Tax revenue” was registered in 2008 (107.28%) and the minimum in 2011 (90.59%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 22.10-24.83%.

The analysis of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2008, 2009, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009 is above the equilibrium value and in 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Broad money” was registered in 2000 (117.22%) and the minimum in 2006 (91.25%).

The analysis of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Exports” was registered in 2016 (109.91%) and the minimum in 2011 (94.44%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 19.63-22.34%.

The analysis of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2000, 2007, 2008, 2011, 2012, 2013 is above the equilibrium value and in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2009, 2010, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2010 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Imports” was registered in 2012 (110.83%) and the minimum in 2002 (88.56%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 13.80-23.64%.

The analysis of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 is above the equilibrium value and in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2009 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Trade balance” was registered in 2011 (386.94%) and the minimum in 2009 (-317.53%).

The analysis of “Output” emphasizes that in 2000, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2010, 2011 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Output” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2010, 2011 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Output” was registered in 2008 (101.19%) and the minimum in 2003 (99.05%).

The analysis of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2010, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2009, 2011 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Real interest rate (%)” was registered in 2016 (477.37%) and the minimum in 2009 (24.73%).

Figure 3.3.1.

Figure 3.3.2.

Figure 3.3.3.

Figure 3.3.4.

Figure 3.3.5.

Figure 3.3.6.

Figure 3.3.7.

Figure 3.3.8

Figure 3.3.9.

Figure 3.3.10.

Figure 3.3.11.

Figure 3.3.12.

Figure 3.3.13.

3.4. Azerbaijan

After the analysis during 2000-2016 the model equations are:

  (124)    D(t)=C(t)+G(t)+I(t)+EX(t)-IM(t)

  (125)    C(t)=0.4297DI(t)+2427857742

  (126)    G(t)=-0.0649TI(t)+7456542350

  (127)    TI(t)=TR(t)+OR(t)

  (128)    OR(t)=-0.1594Y(t)+23771461962

  (129)    I(t)=0.2892Y(t)+40431991r(t)-563882308

  (130)    DI(t)=Y(t)+TF(t)-TR(t)

  (131)    TF(t)=-0.2840Y(t)+4896655332

  (132)    TR(t)=0.1180Y(t)+1099574075

  (133)    IM(t)=0.4549Y(t)-4995651122

  (134)    EX(t)=0.9432Y(t)-13242142232

  (135)    D(t)=Y(t)

  (136)    MD(t)=0.3699Y(t)+79997794r(t)-5707566063

  (137)    MS(t)=1413436740t-2828466045162

  (138)    MD(t)=MS(t)

Solving the equations (1)-(15) we find that at equilibrium (t” being the year):

  (139)    Y(t)=4769268694.25t-9517370341748.70

  (140)    r(t)=-4.3817t+8716.9661

  (141)    TI(t)=-197171942.85t+418339829969.17

  (142)    G(t)=12803538.42t-19708732837.95

  (143)    DI(t)=2852109836.47t-5687764310900.61

  (144)    C(t)=1225658862.52t-2441818379365.72

  (145)    OR(t)=-759992975.73t+1540384400103.14

  (146)    TR(t)=562821032.89t-1122044570133.97

  (147)    TF(t)=-1354337824.89t+2707561460714.12

  (148)    I(t)=1202171872.40t-2400662880207.38

  (149)    IM(t)=2169665496.57t-4334697199169.50

  (150)    EX(t)=4498299917.47t-8989877548507.14

  (151)    MD(t)=MS(t)=1413436740.32t-2828466045161.59

From the relationships (16)-(28) we can draw the following conclusions:

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2010, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2011 is above the equilibrium value and in 2010, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of households” was registered in 2009 (114.95%) and the minimum in 2004 (63.99%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 43.56-47.17%.

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of the government” emphasizes that in 2009, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2010 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of the government” was registered in 2011 (104.32%) and the minimum in 2008 (92.10%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 31.82-42.49%.

The analysis of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Other revenues” was registered in 2014 (153.66%) and the minimum in 2009 (99.66%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 26.34-115.34%.

The analysis of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2003, 2004, 2013, 2014 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Investment” was registered in 2014 (142.33%) and the minimum in 2001 (52.95%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 42.02-50.00%.

The analysis of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Government transfers” was registered in 2016 (251.04%) and the minimum in 2014 (-33.98%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 0.00-0.00%.

The analysis of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Tax revenue” was registered in 2008 (93.49%) and the minimum in 2011 (66.11%).

The analysis of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2002, 2009, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2009 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Broad money” was registered in 2002 (156.13%) and the minimum in 2001 (-1098.56%).

The analysis of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Exports” was registered in 2013 (99.74%) and the minimum in 2004 (22.79%).

The analysis of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2013, 2014 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Imports” was registered in 2014 (109.96%) and the minimum in 2001 (39.02%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 61.37-65.94%.

The analysis of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Trade balance” was registered in 2013 (92.40%) and the minimum in 2004 (-3.30%).

The analysis of “Output” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Output” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Output” was registered in 2009 (78.72%) and the minimum in 2004 (48.66%).

The analysis of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Real interest rate (%)” was registered in 2008 (7.68%) and the minimum in 2009 (-55.97%).

Figure 3.4.1.

Figure 3.4.2.

Figure 3.4.3.

Figure 3.4.4

Figure 3.4.5.

Figure 3.4.6.

Figure 3.4.7.

Figure 3.4.8.

Figure 3.4.9.

Figure 3.4.10.

Figure 3.4.11.

Figure 3.4.12.

Figure 3.4.13.

 

3.5. Bangladesh

After the analysis during 2000-2016 the model equations are:

  (152)    D(t)=C(t)+G(t)+I(t)+EX(t)-IM(t)

  (153)    C(t)=0.5850DI(t)+13399633911

  (154)    G(t)=0.3724TI(t)+1748602319

  (155)    TI(t)=TR(t)+OR(t)

  (156)    OR(t)=0.0190Y(t)+1746348

  (157)    I(t)=0.3723Y(t)+98763368r(t)-12560243229

  (158)    DI(t)=Y(t)+TF(t)-TR(t)

  (159)    TF(t)=0.1572Y(t)-2678216027

  (160)    TR(t)=0.1088Y(t)-3212918580

  (161)    IM(t)=0.3481Y(t)-13805342533

  (162)    EX(t)=0.2849Y(t)-13595163994

  (163)    D(t)=Y(t)

  (164)    MD(t)=0.7559Y(t)-732079890r(t)-20008188589

  (165)    MS(t)=4800146712t-9581534615351

  (166)    MD(t)=MS(t)

Solving the equations (1)-(15) we find that at equilibrium (t” being the year):

  (167)    Y(t)=8984244517.22t-17922499385707.50

  (168)    r(t)=2.7200t-5445.5243

  (169)    TI(t)=1148734841.63t-2294800571198.94

  (170)    G(t)=427817433.22t-852892220384.06

  (171)    DI(t)=9419018648.63t-18789287371004.50

  (172)    C(t)=5510520651.58t-10979120919326.30

  (173)    OR(t)=170898861.83t-340921159343.21

  (174)    TR(t)=977835979.79t-1953879411855.73

  (175)    TF(t)=1412610111.19t-2820667397152.76

  (176)    I(t)=3613747390.58t-7223471607146.37

  (177)    IM(t)=3127458348.99t-6252712824538.96

  (178)    EX(t)=2559617390.85t-5119727463389.72

  (179)    MD(t)=MS(t)=4800146712.45t-9581534615351.34

From the relationships (16)-(28) we can draw the following conclusions:

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 is above the equilibrium value and in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of households” was registered in 2000 (125.30%) and the minimum in 2014 (87.93%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 76.53-78.38%.

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of the government” emphasizes that in 2001, 2002, 2006 is above the equilibrium value and in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of the government” was registered in 2001 (112.73%) and the minimum in 2012 (83.35%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 5.33-6.20%.

The analysis of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2001, 2002, 2014 is above the equilibrium value and in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Other revenues” was registered in 2002 (131.02%) and the minimum in 2015 (61.29%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 2.04-2.37%.

The analysis of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 is above the equilibrium value and in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Investment” was registered in 2000 (331.71%) and the minimum in 2010 (75.58%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 19.91-22.99%.

The analysis of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2001, 2002, 2008, 2011, 2012, 2013 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2008, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2010 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Government transfers” was registered in 2001 (114.94%) and the minimum in 2016 (35.74%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 9.74-17.36%.

The analysis of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2001, 2002, 2003 is above the equilibrium value and in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Tax revenue” was registered in 2001 (168.04%) and the minimum in 2009 (77.29%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 6.95-7.30%.

The analysis of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Broad money” was registered in 2002 (118.73%) and the minimum in 2009 (88.40%).

The analysis of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2001, 2006 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Exports” was registered in 2001 (221.27%) and the minimum in 2000 (-805.59%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 6.49-16.62%.

The analysis of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2005, 2006, 2007 is above the equilibrium value and in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Imports” was registered in 2000 (286.39%) and the minimum in 2003 (64.31%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 9.42-27.07%.

The analysis of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2008 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Trade balance” was registered in 2007 (137.41%) and the minimum in 2002 (58.52%).

The analysis of “Output” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 is above the equilibrium value and in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Output” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Output” was registered in 2000 (145.71%) and the minimum in 2011 (84.75%).

The analysis of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2003, 2004 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Real interest rate (%)” was registered in 2003 (218.49%) and the minimum in 2002 (-31188.48%).

Figure 3.5.1.

Figure 3.5.2.

Figure 3.5.3.

Figure 3.5.4.

Figure 3.5.5.

Figure 3.5.6.

Figure 3.5.7.

Figure 3.5.8.

Figure 3.5.9.

Figure 3.5.10.

Figure 3.5.11.

Figure 3.5.12.

Figure 3.5.13.

 

3.6. Bahrain

After the analysis during 2000-2015 the model equations are:

  (180)    D(t)=C(t)+G(t)+I(t)+EX(t)-IM(t)

  (181)    C(t)=0.7619DI(t)-7912124725

  (182)    G(t)=-0.1331TI(t)+4126764726

  (183)    TI(t)=TR(t)+OR(t)

  (184)    OR(t)=0.0899Y(t)+2581214845

  (185)    I(t)=0.2140Y(t)-42239956r(t)+1640650017

  (186)    DI(t)=Y(t)+TF(t)-TR(t)

  (187)    TF(t)=1.0614Y(t)-31605958044

  (188)    TR(t)=-0.0340Y(t)+1120019109

  (189)    IM(t)=1.5734Y(t)-24128501794

  (190)    EX(t)=1.3835Y(t)-14013465887

  (191)    D(t)=Y(t)

  (192)    MD(t)=0.9542Y(t)+87424650r(t)-6428990541

  (193)    MS(t)=1105432759t-2203684448050

  (194)    MD(t)=MS(t)

Solving the equations (1)-(15) we find that at equilibrium (t” being the year):

  (195)    Y(t)=497163403.26t-971955890343.12

  (196)    r(t)=7.2182t-14524.9182

  (197)    TI(t)=27798940.79t-50645775634.70

  (198)    G(t)=-3699763.06t+10867214699.79

  (199)    DI(t)=1041790001.00t-2069428440238.51

  (200)    C(t)=793768746.73t-1584667150086.36

  (201)    OR(t)=44712964.93t-84832760824.07

  (202)    TR(t)=-16914024.14t+34186985189.37

  (203)    TF(t)=527712573.60t-1063285564706.02

  (204)    I(t)=-198511755.58t+407188808764.52

  (205)    IM(t)=782237642.91t-1553405354627.74

  (206)    EX(t)=687843818.09t-1358750118348.80

  (207)    MD(t)=MS(t)=1105432759.05t-2203684448050.46

From the relationships (16)-(28) we can draw the following conclusions:

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of households” was registered in 2010 (97.98%) and the minimum in 2007 (79.57%).

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of the government” emphasizes that in 2011, 2012, 2013 is above the equilibrium value and in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of the government” was registered in 2013 (139.20%) and the minimum in 2006 (68.05%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 15.20-16.93%.

The analysis of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2013 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2009 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2008, 2010, 2011 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Other revenues” was registered in 2013 (127.31%) and the minimum in 2001 (75.30%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 18.42-21.01%.

The analysis of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Investment” was registered in 2014 (112.52%) and the minimum in 2006 (60.44%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 23.73-27.78%.

The analysis of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is above the equilibrium value and in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2009, 2010 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Government transfers” was registered in 2014 (1103.93%) and the minimum in 2015 (-2816.27%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between -73.95--65.01%.

The analysis of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013 is above the equilibrium value and in 2005, 2006 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Tax revenue” was registered in 2004 (266.04%) and the minimum in 2005 (83.09%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 0.90-3.01%.

The analysis of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2009, 2010, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Broad money” was registered in 2000 (128.43%) and the minimum in 2005 (82.51%).

The analysis of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2012, 2013, 2014 is above the equilibrium value and in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2014 is above the equilibrium value and in 2015 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Exports” was registered in 2012 (111.80%) and the minimum in 2010 (75.08%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 89.70-103.54%.

The analysis of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2012, 2013, 2014 is above the equilibrium value and in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2014 is above the equilibrium value and in 2015 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Imports” was registered in 2012 (115.58%) and the minimum in 2009 (61.65%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 75.45-86.92%.

The analysis of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2006, 2007, 2009, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2014 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Trade balance” was registered in 2015 (131.97%) and the minimum in 2013 (77.60%).

The analysis of “Output” emphasizes that in 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Output” emphasizes that in 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Output” was registered in 2015 (103.19%) and the minimum in 2006 (82.39%).

The analysis of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2013 is above the equilibrium value and in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Real interest rate (%)” was registered in 2013 (103.31%) and the minimum in 2012 (-157.29%).

Figure 3.6.1.

Figure 3.6.2.

Figure 3.6.3.

Figure 3.6.4.

Figure 3.6.5.

Figure 3.6.6.

Figure 3.6.7.

Figure 3.6.8.

Figure 3.6.9.

Figure 3.6.10.

Figure 3.6.11.

Figure 3.6.12.

Figure 3.6.13.

3.7. Brunei Darussalam

After the analysis during 2000-2016 the model equations are:

  (208)    D(t)=C(t)+G(t)+I(t)+EX(t)-IM(t)

  (209)    C(t)=0.5489DI(t)-5343963982

  (210)    G(t)=0.5489TI(t)-5343963982

  (211)    TI(t)=TR(t)+OR(t)

  (212)    OR(t)=0.5489Y(t)-5343963982

  (213)    I(t)=1.6176Y(t)+28923072r(t)-18510777936

  (214)    DI(t)=Y(t)+TF(t)-TR(t)

  (215)    TF(t)=-0.9415Y(t)+13019711840

  (216)    TR(t)=-0.9415Y(t)+13019711840

  (217)    IM(t)=1.6834Y(t)-18869955352

  (218)    EX(t)=-0.3398Y(t)+14040348160

  (219)    D(t)=Y(t)

  (220)    MD(t)=-2.8145Y(t)+43555823r(t)+46974518059

  (221)    MS(t)=-140930494t+292289021677

  (222)    MD(t)=MS(t)

Solving the equations (1)-(15) we find that at equilibrium (t” being the year):

  (223)    Y(t)=117451857.56t-214391983905.34

  (224)    r(t)=4.3539t-8221.4265

  (225)    TI(t)=-46107133.06t+91837888288.73

  (226)    G(t)=-25309486.16t+45068404091.13

  (227)    DI(t)=117451857.56t-214391983905.34

  (228)    C(t)=64472587.34t-123029679606.63

  (229)    OR(t)=64472587.34t-123029679606.63

  (230)    TR(t)=-110579720.41t+214867567895.37

  (231)    TF(t)=-110579720.41t+214867567895.37

  (232)    I(t)=315913333.25t-603091533339.95

  (233)    IM(t)=197717929.59t-379776458307.98

  (234)    EX(t)=-39906647.29t+86884366642.14

  (235)    MD(t)=MS(t)=-140930494.33t+292289021676.53

From the relationships (16)-(28) we can draw the following conclusions:

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of households” was registered in 2013 (37.86%) and the minimum in 2002 (23.31%).

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of the government” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of the government” was registered in (0.00%) and the minimum in (0.00%).

The analysis of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Other revenues” was registered in (0.00%) and the minimum in (0.00%).

The analysis of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Investment” was registered in 2013 (20.07%) and the minimum in 2000 (5.55%).

The analysis of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Government transfers” was registered in 2011 (6.14%) and the minimum in 2016 (-10.34%).

The analysis of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Tax revenue” was registered in (0.00%) and the minimum in (0.00%).

The analysis of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2010, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2010 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Broad money” was registered in 2016 (150.70%) and the minimum in 2008 (68.86%).

The analysis of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Exports” was registered in 2006 (157.63%) and the minimum in 2015 (117.25%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 55.65-81.59%.

The analysis of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Imports” was registered in 2013 (39.89%) and the minimum in 2004 (13.64%).

The analysis of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Trade balance” was registered in 2013 (-13.01%) and the minimum in 2000 (-87.53%).

The analysis of “Output” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Output” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Output” was registered in 2012 (65.46%) and the minimum in 2000 (58.36%).

The analysis of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Real interest rate (%)” was registered in 2009 (6.74%) and the minimum in 2000 (-3.75%).

Figure 3.7.1.

Figure 3.7.2.

Figure 3.7.3

Figure 3.7.4.

Figure 3.7.5.

Figure 3.7.6.

Figure 3.7.7.

Figure 3.7.8.

Figure 3.7.9.

Figure 3.7.10.

3.8. Bhutan

After the analysis during 2000-2016 the model equations are:

  (236)    D(t)=C(t)+G(t)+I(t)+EX(t)-IM(t)

  (237)    C(t)=0.6522DI(t)-166130788

  (238)    G(t)=0.7420TI(t)+70983338

  (239)    TI(t)=TR(t)+OR(t)

  (240)    OR(t)=0.0276Y(t)+76286781

  (241)    I(t)=0.4625Y(t)-21975367r(t)+264327051

  (242)    DI(t)=Y(t)+TF(t)-TR(t)

  (243)    TF(t)=0.0477Y(t)+25742382

  (244)    TR(t)=0.1741Y(t)-81044984

  (245)    IM(t)=0.5850Y(t)+5508297

  (246)    EX(t)=0.3373Y(t)+55088908

  (247)    D(t)=Y(t)

  (248)    MD(t)=0.6928Y(t)-6607698r(t)-110502495

  (249)    MS(t)=68883912t-137535582276

  (250)    MD(t)=MS(t)

Solving the equations (1)-(15) we find that at equilibrium (t” being the year):

  (251)    Y(t)=96667635.09t-192734074690.91

  (252)    r(t)=-0.2893t+589.7782

  (253)    TI(t)=19500126.30t-38883735587.12

  (254)    G(t)=14468694.30t-28779952027.30

  (255)    DI(t)=84450683.68t-168269364171.03

  (256)    C(t)=55077426.85t-109908801804.13

  (257)    OR(t)=2672115.50t-5251325793.61

  (258)    TR(t)=16828010.80t-33632409793.51

  (259)    TF(t)=4611059.38t-9167699273.63

  (260)    I(t)=51068004.33t-101838954185.73

  (261)    IM(t)=56554195.37t-112751160508.76

  (262)    EX(t)=32607704.99t-64957527182.51

  (263)    MD(t)=MS(t)=68883912.34t-137535582276.24

From the relationships (16)-(28) we can draw the following conclusions:

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of households” was registered in 2000 (135.52%) and the minimum in 2006 (70.80%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 41.13-62.50%.

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of the government” emphasizes that in 2005, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of the government” was registered in 2011 (114.17%) and the minimum in 2008 (91.67%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 19.98-23.14%.

The analysis of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2001, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010 is above the equilibrium value and in 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Other revenues” was registered in 2009 (166.37%) and the minimum in 2003 (61.76%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 8.34-14.14%.

The analysis of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2013, 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2009 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Investment” was registered in 2011 (127.42%) and the minimum in 2007 (57.04%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 48.30-63.97%.

The analysis of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2006, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is above the equilibrium value and in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2009 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Government transfers” was registered in 2000 (125.53%) and the minimum in 2004 (69.71%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 6.52-9.92%.

The analysis of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2009 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Tax revenue” was registered in 2000 (292.21%) and the minimum in 2007 (67.53%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 8.53-14.70%.

The analysis of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 is above the equilibrium value and in 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Broad money” was registered in 2000 (140.84%) and the minimum in 2006 (77.68%).

The analysis of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Exports” was registered in 2007 (146.29%) and the minimum in 2002 (62.86%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 37.75-57.13%.

The analysis of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2004, 2005, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Imports” was registered in 2010 (121.53%) and the minimum in 2001 (86.67%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 61.39-70.73%.

The analysis of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2009 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Trade balance” was registered in 2004 (154.97%) and the minimum in 2007 (11.20%).

The analysis of “Output” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Output” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2009 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Output” was registered in 2000 (114.56%) and the minimum in 2006 (91.17%).

The analysis of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2000, 2003, 2004, 2007, 2013, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2001, 2002, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Real interest rate (%)” was registered in 2015 (159.02%) and the minimum in 2012 (57.38%).

Figure 3.8.1.

Figure 3.8.2.

Figure 3.8.3.

Figure 3.8.4.

Figure 3.8.5.

Figure 3.8.6.

Figure 3.8.7.

Figure 3.8.8.

Figure 3.8.9.

Figure 3.8.10.

Figure 3.8.11.

Figure 3.8.12.

Figure 3.8.13.

 

3.9. Hong Kong SAR, China

After the analysis during 2000-2016 the model equations are:

  (264)    D(t)=C(t)+G(t)+I(t)+EX(t)-IM(t)

  (265)    C(t)=0.6544DI(t)-7973564009

  (266)    G(t)=0.6544TI(t)-7973564009

  (267)    TI(t)=TR(t)+OR(t)

  (268)    OR(t)=0.6544Y(t)-7973564009

  (269)    I(t)=0.2016Y(t)+47860576r(t)+6637354284

  (270)    DI(t)=Y(t)+TF(t)-TR(t)

  (271)    TF(t)=0.0311Y(t)-1662495605

  (272)    TR(t)=0.0311Y(t)-1662495605

  (273)    IM(t)=2.8710Y(t)-207851395794

  (274)    EX(t)=2.9280Y(t)-211976963722

  (275)    D(t)=Y(t)

  (276)    MD(t)=5.7209Y(t)+4757421508r(t)-608454686664

  (277)    MS(t)=43124056973t-85964450861556

  (278)    MD(t)=MS(t)

Solving the equations (1)-(15) we find that at equilibrium (t” being the year):

  (279)    Y(t)=-1426584682.94t+2888573123311.12

  (280)    r(t)=10.7801t-21415.2449

  (281)    TI(t)=-978011335.36t+1970658059199.32

  (282)    G(t)=-640038603.50t+1281681460005.47

  (283)    DI(t)=-1426584682.94t+2888573123311.12

  (284)    C(t)=-933597838.02t+1882391343957.31

  (285)    OR(t)=-933597838.02t+1882391343957.31

  (286)    TR(t)=-44413497.34t+88266715242.01

  (287)    TF(t)=-44413497.34t+88266715242.01

  (288)    I(t)=228277304.47t-435840990566.27

  (289)    IM(t)=-4095785675.46t+8085365657807.79

  (290)    EX(t)=-4177011221.35t+8245706967722.40

  (291)    MD(t)=MS(t)=43124056973.48t-85964450861555.60

From the relationships (16)-(28) we can draw the following conclusions:

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of households” was registered in 2016 (69224.42%) and the minimum in 2000 (663.71%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 59.01-66.54%.

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of the government” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of the government” was registered in (0.00%) and the minimum in (0.00%).

The analysis of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Other revenues” was registered in (0.00%) and the minimum in (0.00%).

The analysis of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Investment” was registered in 2014 (258.58%) and the minimum in 2002 (185.31%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 21.63-26.63%.

The analysis of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Government transfers” was registered in 2005 (-132.43%) and the minimum in 2008 (-1430.97%).

The analysis of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Tax revenue” was registered in (0.00%) and the minimum in (0.00%).

The analysis of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2008, 2014, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2008 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Broad money” was registered in 2000 (115.75%) and the minimum in 2005 (93.33%).

The analysis of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Exports” was registered in 2001 (-194.97%) and the minimum in 2013 (-334.68%).

The analysis of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Imports” was registered in 2001 (-202.97%) and the minimum in 2013 (-338.88%).

The analysis of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001 is above the equilibrium value and in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Trade balance” was registered in 2000 (209.15%) and the minimum in 2006 (-755.17%).

The analysis of “Output” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Output” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Output” was registered in 2016 (2145.04%) and the minimum in 2000 (433.29%).

The analysis of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Real interest rate (%)” was registered in 2000 (9.21%) and the minimum in 2011 (0.40%).

Figure 3.9.1.

Figure 3.9.2.

Figure 3.9.3.

Figure 3.9.4.

Figure 3.9.5.

Figure 3.9.6.

Figure 3.9.7.

Figure 3.9.8.

Figure 3.9.9.

 

3.10. Indonesia

After the analysis during 2000-2016 the model equations are:

  (292)    D(t)=C(t)+G(t)+I(t)+EX(t)-IM(t)

  (293)    C(t)=0.5620DI(t)+8670008790

  (294)    G(t)=0.2814TI(t)+35518342437

  (295)    TI(t)=TR(t)+OR(t)

  (296)    OR(t)=0.0188Y(t)+10981711620

  (297)    I(t)=0.3745Y(t)+1154433664r(t)-39599758593

  (298)    DI(t)=Y(t)+TF(t)-TR(t)

  (299)    TF(t)=1.2936Y(t)-1191143276319

  (300)    TR(t)=0.1460Y(t)-38067989082

  (301)    IM(t)=0.2470Y(t)-19096040206

  (302)    EX(t)=0.2540Y(t)-13798864159

  (303)    D(t)=Y(t)

  (304)    MD(t)=0.2139Y(t)+1800336924r(t)+100985705256

  (305)    MS(t)=7959940076t-15723367523662

  (306)    MD(t)=MS(t)

Solving the equations (1)-(15) we find that at equilibrium (t” being the year):

  (307)    Y(t)=-10257461156.88t+21689531802734.70

  (308)    r(t)=5.6403t-11367.1768

  (309)    TI(t)=-1690668645.70t+3547854031634.60

  (310)    G(t)=-475805161.60t+1033991499883.49

  (311)    DI(t)=-22028474387.15t+45426413387266.80

  (312)    C(t)=-12379649992.54t+25537587185130.20

  (313)    OR(t)=-192636602.26t+418314252029.05

  (314)    TR(t)=-1498032043.43t+3129539779605.55

  (315)    TF(t)=-13269045273.71t+26866421364137.70

  (316)    I(t)=2669797367.50t-5039173196003.91

  (317)    IM(t)=-2533330800.54t+5337664090280.71

  (318)    EX(t)=-2605134170.77t+5494790404005.65

  (319)    MD(t)=MS(t)=7959940075.96t-15723367523661.70

From the relationships (16)-(28) we can draw the following conclusions:

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of households” was registered in 2016 (98.82%) and the minimum in 2010 (64.86%).

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of the government” emphasizes that in 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2012, 2013 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2010, 2011 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of the government” was registered in 2016 (125.67%) and the minimum in 2001 (37.77%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 9.51-9.84%.

The analysis of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2008, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is above the equilibrium value and in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2009, 2010, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2011, 2012, 2013 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2010 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Other revenues” was registered in 2008 (131.21%) and the minimum in 2015 (72.50%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 3.93-6.45%.

The analysis of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Investment” was registered in 2016 (103.01%) and the minimum in 2000 (45.62%).

The analysis of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Government transfers” was registered in 2016 (62.38%) and the minimum in 2009 (-304.93%).

The analysis of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Tax revenue” was registered in 2016 (97.91%) and the minimum in 2001 (38.72%).

The analysis of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Broad money” was registered in 2016 (129.25%) and the minimum in 2010 (79.50%).

The analysis of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Exports” was registered in 2014 (91.69%) and the minimum in 2000 (33.73%).

The analysis of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Imports” was registered in 2014 (93.70%) and the minimum in 2000 (31.37%).

The analysis of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2003, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2012, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2011 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Trade balance” was registered in 2016 (136.59%) and the minimum in 2012 (30.33%).

The analysis of “Output” emphasizes that in 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Output” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Output” was registered in 2016 (102.69%) and the minimum in 2000 (38.60%).

The analysis of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Real interest rate (%)” was registered in 2016 (247.72%) and the minimum in 2015 (-431.94%).

Figure 3.10.1.

Figure 3.10.2.

Figure 3.10.3.

Figure 3.10.4.

Figure 3.10.5.

Figure 3.10.6.

Figure 3.10.7.

Figure 3.10.8.

Figure 3.10.9.

Figure 3.10.10.

Figure 3.10.11.

Figure 3.10.12.

Figure 3.10.13.

3.11. India

After the analysis during 2000-2016 the model equations are:

  (320)    D(t)=C(t)+G(t)+I(t)+EX(t)-IM(t)

  (321)    C(t)=0.5390DI(t)+47888398391

  (322)    G(t)=0.7073TI(t)+24218633693

  (323)    TI(t)=TR(t)+OR(t)

  (324)    OR(t)=0.0074Y(t)+18593807874

  (325)    I(t)=0.3693Y(t)-14053013127r(t)+53079019961

  (326)    DI(t)=Y(t)+TF(t)-TR(t)

  (327)    TF(t)=-0.0323Y(t)+145290869632

  (328)    TR(t)=0.1221Y(t)-24234220625

  (329)    IM(t)=0.2894Y(t)-77530647080

  (330)    EX(t)=0.2667Y(t)-82193006389

  (331)    D(t)=Y(t)

  (332)    MD(t)=0.8775Y(t)-1065084846r(t)-276901926826

  (333)    MS(t)=92063603350t-183846302489734

  (334)    MD(t)=MS(t)

Solving the equations (1)-(15) we find that at equilibrium (t” being the year):

  (335)    Y(t)=103964611467.37t-207281514748020.00

  (336)    r(t)=-0.7838t+1577.4466

  (337)    TI(t)=13465028911.16t-26851809983702.70

  (338)    G(t)=9523289329.48t-18967018383481.10

  (339)    DI(t)=87909610826.97t-175102012367876.00

  (340)    C(t)=47385279812.57t-94336079108039.80

  (341)    OR(t)=765825250.66t-1508285538358.58

  (342)    TR(t)=12699203660.50t-25343524445344.10

  (343)    TF(t)=-3355796979.90t+6835977934800.25

  (344)    I(t)=49411754937.93t-98670503836660.00

  (345)    IM(t)=30086544518.29t-60063178005954.20

  (346)    EX(t)=27730831905.68t-55371091425793.40

  (347)    MD(t)=MS(t)=92063603349.69t-183846302489734.00

From the relationships (16)-(28) we can draw the following conclusions:

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2009, 2010 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of households” was registered in 2000 (116.21%) and the minimum in 2004 (92.02%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 55.80-63.11%.

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of the government” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2013 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of the government” was registered in 2000 (121.92%) and the minimum in 2006 (86.91%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 10.66-12.08%.

The analysis of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2007, 2010, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2013 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2010, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2009, 2011 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Other revenues” was registered in 2010 (150.99%) and the minimum in 2011 (73.28%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 1.76-3.00%.

The analysis of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2007, 2010 is above the equilibrium value and in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2010 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Investment” was registered in 2000 (139.78%) and the minimum in 2016 (86.81%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 26.44-39.70%.

The analysis of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Government transfers” was registered in 2013 (239.85%) and the minimum in 2016 (-43.12%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 9.30-11.85%.

The analysis of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2006, 2007 is above the equilibrium value and in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Tax revenue” was registered in 2000 (130.61%) and the minimum in 2009 (88.30%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 8.19-12.27%.

The analysis of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2011, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2011 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Broad money” was registered in 2000 (149.20%) and the minimum in 2006 (89.32%).

The analysis of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2000, 2006, 2008, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is above the equilibrium value and in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2010 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Exports” was registered in 2000 (118.26%) and the minimum in 2003 (84.35%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 13.34-24.87%.

The analysis of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2000, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 is above the equilibrium value and in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Imports” was registered in 2012 (122.01%) and the minimum in 2003 (77.90%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 14.96-30.84%.

The analysis of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Trade balance” was registered in 2011 (242.56%) and the minimum in 2002 (13.17%).

The analysis of “Output” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Output” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Output” was registered in 2000 (123.94%) and the minimum in 2008 (93.62%).

The analysis of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2006, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Real interest rate (%)” was registered in 2012 (488.16%) and the minimum in 2013 (-1395.16%).

 

Figure 3.11.1.

Figure 3.11.2.

Figure 3.11.3.

Figure 3.11.4.

Figure 3.11.5.

Figure 3.11.6.

Figure 3.11.7.

Figure 3.11.8.

Figure 3.11.9.

Figure 3.11.10.

Figure 3.11.11.

Figure 3.11.12.

Figure 3.11.13.

 

3.12. Iran, Islamic Rep.

After the analysis during 2000-2016 the model equations are:

  (348)    D(t)=C(t)+G(t)+I(t)+EX(t)-IM(t)

  (349)    C(t)=0.4171DI(t)+14139446277

  (350)    G(t)=0.2848TI(t)+17009078423

  (351)    TI(t)=TR(t)+OR(t)

  (352)    OR(t)=0.3037Y(t)-40515781415

  (353)    I(t)=0.3835Y(t)-827333811r(t)-11906586731

  (354)    DI(t)=Y(t)+TF(t)-TR(t)

  (355)    TF(t)=-0.0870Y(t)+52090329234

  (356)    TR(t)=0.0895Y(t)-11606967883

  (357)    IM(t)=0.0407Y(t)+54615369940

  (358)    EX(t)=0.1059Y(t)+63048762379

  (359)    D(t)=Y(t)

  (360)    MD(t)=1.5214Y(t)+4038368950r(t)-433691710126

  (361)    MS(t)=17516229482t-34944557086723

  (362)    MD(t)=MS(t)

Solving the equations (1)-(15) we find that at equilibrium (t” being the year):

  (363)    Y(t)=16632085534.62t-32951516525033.70

  (364)    r(t)=-1.9284t+3868.1385

  (365)    TI(t)=6540902376.18t-13010969809612.70

  (366)    G(t)=1862616116.16t-3688051884191.66

  (367)    DI(t)=13695985202.84t-27070812190501.50

  (368)    C(t)=5712429593.23t-11276768537300.80

  (369)    OR(t)=5051915460.02t-10049379397299.50

  (370)    TR(t)=1488986916.16t-2961590412313.16

  (371)    TF(t)=-1447113415.62t+2919113922219.09

  (372)    I(t)=7973102115.25t-15847630236886.90

  (373)    IM(t)=677635650.82t-1287917549311.39

  (374)    EX(t)=1761573360.81t-3426983415965.67

  (375)    MD(t)=MS(t)=17516229482.13t-34944557086723.00

From the relationships (16)-(28) we can draw the following conclusions:

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of households” was registered in 2007 (114.91%) and the minimum in 2016 (89.23%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 37.79-47.20%.

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of the government” emphasizes that in 2004, 2005, 2006 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2007, 2008, 2009 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of the government” was registered in 2006 (117.21%) and the minimum in 2001 (95.31%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 9.95-11.64%.

The analysis of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2008, 2009 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Other revenues” was registered in 2005 (121.86%) and the minimum in 2009 (83.02%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 15.43-21.10%.

The analysis of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2004, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 is above the equilibrium value and in 2005, 2006, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Investment” was registered in 2010 (111.07%) and the minimum in 2015 (68.08%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 35.74-40.66%.

The analysis of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009 is above the equilibrium value and in 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Government transfers” was registered in 2009 (284.48%) and the minimum in 2011 (0.44%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 4.30-7.31%.

The analysis of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009 is above the equilibrium value and in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2008 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2009 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Tax revenue” was registered in 2009 (113.74%) and the minimum in 2002 (88.29%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 4.55-7.34%.

The analysis of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2007, 2009, 2010, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2012, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Broad money” was registered in 2016 (132.74%) and the minimum in 2013 (80.23%).

The analysis of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2000, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2001, 2002, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 is above the equilibrium value and in 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Exports” was registered in 2016 (117.10%) and the minimum in 2013 (73.62%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 23.54-25.35%.

The analysis of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 is above the equilibrium value and in 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Imports” was registered in 2008 (132.97%) and the minimum in 2015 (55.68%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 16.79-20.91%.

The analysis of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Trade balance” was registered in 2016 (218.09%) and the minimum in 2008 (47.52%).

The analysis of “Output” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2011 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Output” emphasizes that in 2008, 2010, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2011 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Output” was registered in 2003 (125.40%) and the minimum in 2011 (96.19%). The analysis of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009 is above the equilibrium value and in 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Real interest rate (%)” was registered in 2006 (1694.74%) and the minimum in 2004 (-169.85%).

Figure 3.12.1

Figure 3.12.2.

Figure 3.12.3.

Figure 3.12.4.

Figure 3.12.5.

Figure 3.12.6.

Figure 3.12.7.

Figure 3.12.8.

Figure 3.12.9.

Figure 3.12.10.

Figure 3.12.11.

Figure 3.12.12.

Figure 3.12.13.

3.13. Israel

After the analysis during 2000-2016 the model equations are:

  (376)    D(t)=C(t)+G(t)+I(t)+EX(t)-IM(t)

  (377)    C(t)=0.5501DI(t)+5974310756

  (378)    G(t)=0.6811TI(t)+1497866027

  (379)    TI(t)=TR(t)+OR(t)

  (380)    OR(t)=0.0533Y(t)+10008410548

  (381)    I(t)=0.3181Y(t)+783982941r(t)-32714041187

  (382)    DI(t)=Y(t)+TF(t)-TR(t)

  (383)    TF(t)=0.0162Y(t)+41068809590

  (384)    TR(t)=0.1643Y(t)+16661353406

  (385)    IM(t)=0.3300Y(t)+1743260572

  (386)    EX(t)=0.3713Y(t)-7778179166

  (387)    D(t)=Y(t)

  (388)    MD(t)=1.5137Y(t)+341345324r(t)-192518015214

  (389)    MS(t)=5395444567t-10649056685617

  (390)    MD(t)=MS(t)

Solving the equations (1)-(15) we find that at equilibrium (t” being the year):

  (391)    Y(t)=3540054020.55t-6861640409473.28

  (392)    r(t)=0.1075t-204.3658

  (393)    TI(t)=770393282.19t-1466573459338.37

  (394)    G(t)=524737965.29t-997429293370.76

  (395)    DI(t)=3015873645.70t-5821220988201.34

  (396)    C(t)=1658964459.37t-3196148809801.44

  (397)    OR(t)=188804582.44t-355949042325.83

  (398)    TR(t)=581588699.75t-1110624417012.54

  (399)    TF(t)=57408324.90t-70204995740.60

  (400)    I(t)=1210461059.78t-2375763148449.72

  (401)    IM(t)=1168389751.15t-2262931313306.35

  (402)    EX(t)=1314280287.26t-2555230471157.71

  (403)    MD(t)=MS(t)=5395444566.98t-10649056685616.70

From the relationships (16)-(28) we can draw the following conclusions:

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of households” was registered in 2016 (112.04%) and the minimum in 2000 (78.45%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 0.00-0.00%.

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of the government” emphasizes that in 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of the government” was registered in 2015 (107.44%) and the minimum in 2000 (84.12%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 0.00-0.00%.

The analysis of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Other revenues” was registered in 2015 (102.45%) and the minimum in 2001 (87.05%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 0.00-0.00%.

The analysis of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Investment” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Investment” was registered in 2016 (94.38%) and the minimum in 2014 (87.96%).

The analysis of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2009, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Government transfers” was registered in 2015 (136.71%) and the minimum in 2016 (-7.97%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 0.00-0.00%.

The analysis of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Tax revenue” was registered in 2015 (105.49%) and the minimum in 2003 (80.73%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 0.00-0.00%.

The analysis of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Broad money” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Broad money” was registered in 2016 (106.96%) and the minimum in 2014 (98.70%).

The analysis of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2011 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2011 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Exports” was registered in 2011 (101.49%) and the minimum in 2002 (65.37%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 0.00-0.00%.

The analysis of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Imports” was registered in 2016 (106.76%) and the minimum in 2003 (73.81%).

The analysis of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2014 is above the equilibrium value and in 2004, 2005, 2012, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 is above the equilibrium value and in 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Trade balance” was registered in 2003 (4258.17%) and the minimum in 2004 (-1196.27%).

The analysis of “Output” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002 is above the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Output” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Output” was registered in 2002 (127.60%) and the minimum in 2000 (122.83%).

The analysis of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Real interest rate (%)” was registered in 2002 (24.04%) and the minimum in 2001 (10.92%).

 

Figure 3.13.1.

Figure 3.13.2.

Figure 3.13.3.

Figure 3.13.4.

Figure 3.13.5.

Figure 3.13.6.

Figure 3.13.7.

Figure 3.13.8.

Figure 3.13.9.

Figure 3.13.10.

Figure 3.13.11.

3.14. Japan

After the analysis during 2000-2016 the model equations are:

  (404)    D(t)=C(t)+G(t)+I(t)+EX(t)-IM(t)

  (405)    C(t)=0.4725DI(t)+494018798795

  (406)    G(t)=0.5619TI(t)+723610611520

  (407)    TI(t)=TR(t)+OR(t)

  (408)    OR(t)=0.0236Y(t)-68115466721

  (409)    I(t)=-0.0810Y(t)-12515067097r(t)+1864659250645

  (410)    DI(t)=Y(t)+TF(t)-TR(t)

  (411)    TF(t)=0.0445Y(t)+403296835146

  (412)    TR(t)=0.2357Y(t)-779041515605

  (413)    IM(t)=0.4984Y(t)-2045602461288

  (414)    EX(t)=0.6808Y(t)-3095531891461

  (415)    D(t)=Y(t)

  (416)    MD(t)=1.5252Y(t)-330338485620r(t)+3838581928199

  (417)    MS(t)=138952071671t-267272545959730

  (418)    MD(t)=MS(t)

Solving the equations (1)-(15) we find that at equilibrium (t” being the year):

  (419)    Y(t)=12285138387.00t-19033921620761.40

  (420)    r(t)=-0.3639t+732.8245

  (421)    TI(t)=3184853917.39t-5781595482533.86

  (422)    G(t)=1789669189.80t-2525249013243.56

  (423)    DI(t)=9936442802.06t-14212642765923.50

  (424)    C(t)=4695350007.16t-6221999563323.91

  (425)    OR(t)=289363919.05t-516440099419.93

  (426)    TR(t)=2895489998.34t-5265155383113.93

  (427)    TF(t)=546794413.40t-443876528275.99

  (428)    I(t)=3559643778.65t-5765473528959.96

  (429)    IM(t)=6123265776.66t-11532655613194.20

  (430)    EX(t)=8363741188.05t-16053855128428.20

  (431)    MD(t)=MS(t)=138952071671.09t-267272545959730.00

From the relationships (16)-(28) we can draw the following conclusions:

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of households” was registered in 2013 (105.94%) and the minimum in 2000 (94.89%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 56.11-58.87%.

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of the government” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of the government” was registered in 2015 (109.89%) and the minimum in 2000 (88.35%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 19.49-19.97%.

The analysis of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2013, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2008 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Other revenues” was registered in 2007 (125.26%) and the minimum in 2003 (87.73%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 1.18-1.38%.

The analysis of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2008 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Investment” was registered in 2000 (110.72%) and the minimum in 2009 (85.05%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 23.58-28.02%.

The analysis of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2009, 2010, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2008, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2010 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Government transfers” was registered in 2015 (138.40%) and the minimum in 2016 (-0.68%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 11.53-15.21%.

The analysis of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Tax revenue” was registered in 2015 (120.30%) and the minimum in 2009 (82.96%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 9.90-11.47%.

The analysis of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Broad money” was registered in 2000 (116.53%) and the minimum in 2010 (93.54%).

The analysis of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2009 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Exports” was registered in 2016 (121.40%) and the minimum in 2001 (74.00%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 12.94-16.21%.

The analysis of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2009, 2010 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009, 2010 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Imports” was registered in 2014 (120.50%) and the minimum in 2000 (88.17%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 13.46-16.29%.

The analysis of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2013, 2014 is above the equilibrium value and in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Trade balance” was registered in 2001 (344.48%) and the minimum in 2016 (-829.47%).

The analysis of “Output” emphasizes that in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2009 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Output” emphasizes that in 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Output” was registered in 2016 (105.49%) and the minimum in 2000 (96.61%).

The analysis of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Real interest rate (%)” was registered in 2013 (614.06%) and the minimum in 2016 (-94.01%).

 

Figure 3.14.1.

 

 

Figure 3.14.2.

Figure 3.14.3.

Figure 3.14.4.

Figure 3.14.5.

Figure 3.14.6.

Figure 3.14.7.

Figure 3.14.8.

Figure 3.14.9.

Figure 3.14.10.

Figure 3.14.11.

Figure 3.14.12.

Figure 3.14.13.

 

3.15. Kazakhstan

After the analysis during 2000-2016 the model equations are:

  (432)    D(t)=C(t)+G(t)+I(t)+EX(t)-IM(t)

  (433)    C(t)=0.6714DI(t)-14803196990

  (434)    G(t)=0.2417TI(t)+10498874950

  (435)    TI(t)=TR(t)+OR(t)

  (436)    OR(t)=0.0852Y(t)-7247079417

  (437)    I(t)=-7247079417.0338Y(t)+0r(t)

  (438)    DI(t)=Y(t)+TF(t)-TR(t)

  (439)    TF(t)=-0.3593Y(t)+37123538993

  (440)    TR(t)=0.1559Y(t)-8040960447

  (441)    IM(t)=0.2198Y(t)+19868580947

  (442)    EX(t)=0.1608Y(t)+44948988507

  (443)    D(t)=Y(t)

  (444)    MD(t)=-8040960446.6148Y(t)+0r(t)

  (445)    MS(t)=4117372009t-8226045160815

  (446)    MD(t)=MS(t)

Solving the equations (1)-(15) we find that at equilibrium (t” being the year):

  (447)    Y(t)=0.79t-1559.69

  (448)    r(t)=67123872634.0279t-133248435382071.0000

  (449)    TI(t)=0.19t-15288040239.59

  (450)    G(t)=0.05t+6803182182.02

  (451)    DI(t)=0.38t+45164498683.32

  (452)    C(t)=0.26t+15522074610.99

  (453)    OR(t)=0.07t-7247079549.89

  (454)    TR(t)=0.12t-8040960689.70

  (455)    TF(t)=-0.28t+37123539553.30

  (456)    I(t)=0.53t-47405666005.71

  (457)    IM(t)=0.17t+19868580603.70

  (458)    EX(t)=0.13t+44948988256.72

  (459)    MD(t)=MS(t)=4117372009.11t-8226045160815.45

From the relationships (16)-(28) we can draw the following conclusions:

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of households” was registered in 2015 (645.87%) and the minimum in 2000 (229.55%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 0.00-0.00%.

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of the government” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of the government” was registered in 2012 (322.42%) and the minimum in 2000 (102.21%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 0.00-0.00%.

The analysis of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Other revenues” was registered in 2000 (-10.19%) and the minimum in 2012 (-211.81%).

The analysis of “Investment” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Investment” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Investment” was registered in (0.00%) and the minimum in (0.00%).

The analysis of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Government transfers” was registered in 2004 (24.38%) and the minimum in 2016 (-456.91%).

The analysis of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Tax revenue” was registered in 2000 (-84.98%) and the minimum in 2011 (-361.03%).

The analysis of “Broad money” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Broad money” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Broad money” was registered in (0.00%) and the minimum in (0.00%).

The analysis of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Exports” was registered in 2007 (166.51%) and the minimum in 2001 (113.12%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 0.00-0.00%.

The analysis of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Imports” was registered in 2013 (321.01%) and the minimum in 2003 (169.37%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 0.00-0.00%.

The analysis of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2004 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Trade balance” was registered in 2004 (103.02%) and the minimum in 2015 (30.92%).

The analysis of “Output” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Output” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Output” was registered in (0.00%) and the minimum in (0.00%).

The analysis of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Real interest rate (%)” was registered in (0.00%) and the minimum in (0.00%).

Figure 3.15.1.

Figure 3.15.2.

Figure 3.15.3.

 

Figure 3.15.4

Figure 3.15.5

Figure 3.15.6

Figure 3.15.7

 

Figure 3.15.8

 

Figure 3.15.9

3.16. Cambodia

After the analysis during 2000-2016 the model equations are:

  (460)    D(t)=C(t)+G(t)+I(t)+EX(t)-IM(t)

  (461)    C(t)=0.8307DI(t)+250373313

  (462)    G(t)=0.2787TI(t)+212305765

  (463)    TI(t)=TR(t)+OR(t)

  (464)    OR(t)=0.0192Y(t)-23764529

  (465)    I(t)=-23764528.6204Y(t)+0r(t)

  (466)    DI(t)=Y(t)+TF(t)-TR(t)

  (467)    TF(t)=0.1197Y(t)-667072325

  (468)    TR(t)=0.1918Y(t)-887663099

  (469)    IM(t)=0.9973Y(t)-3790602785

  (470)    EX(t)=0.9153Y(t)-3540121438

  (471)    D(t)=Y(t)

  (472)    MD(t)=-887663099.4457Y(t)+0r(t)

  (473)    MS(t)=672022012t-1345276685150

  (474)    MD(t)=MS(t)

Solving the equations (1)-(15) we find that at equilibrium (t” being the year):

  (475)    Y(t)=-1.03t+2057.56

  (476)    r(t)=-1275832795.0274t+2508453759992.2500

  (477)    TI(t)=-0.22t-911427193.83

  (478)    G(t)=-0.06t-41735212.55

  (479)    DI(t)=-0.96t+220592683.67

  (480)    C(t)=-0.80t+433615669.32

  (481)    OR(t)=-0.02t-23764489.04

  (482)    TR(t)=-0.20t-887662704.79

  (483)    TF(t)=-0.12t-667072078.67

  (484)    I(t)=-0.26t-642359577.73

  (485)    IM(t)=-1.03t-3790600732.86

  (486)    EX(t)=-0.95t-3540119554.35

  (487)    MD(t)=MS(t)=672022012.34t-1345276685149.90

From the relationships (16)-(28) we can draw the following conclusions:

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of households” was registered in 2016 (3098.27%) and the minimum in 2000 (1046.81%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 0.00-0.00%.

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of the government” emphasizes that in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of the government” was registered in 2006 (-742.84%) and the minimum in 2016 (-2203.21%).

The analysis of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Other revenues” was registered in 2003 (-507.95%) and the minimum in 2016 (-1506.04%).

The analysis of “Investment” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Investment” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Investment” was registered in (0.00%) and the minimum in (0.00%).

The analysis of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Government transfers” was registered in 2001 (27.30%) and the minimum in 2016 (-223.34%).

The analysis of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Tax revenue” was registered in 2002 (-55.26%) and the minimum in 2016 (-292.43%).

The analysis of “Broad money” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Broad money” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Broad money” was registered in (0.00%) and the minimum in (0.00%).

The analysis of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Exports” was registered in 2000 (-48.93%) and the minimum in 2016 (-350.10%).

The analysis of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Imports” was registered in 2000 (-54.07%) and the minimum in 2016 (-356.97%).

The analysis of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Trade balance” was registered in 2001 (-90.64%) and the minimum in 2016 (-454.14%).

The analysis of “Output” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Output” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Output” was registered in (0.00%) and the minimum in (0.00%).

The analysis of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Real interest rate (%)” was registered in (0.00%) and the minimum in (0.00%).

Figure 3.16.1.

Figure 3.16.2.

Figure 3.16.3.

Figure 3.16.4.

Figure 3.16.5.

Figure 3.16.6.

Figure 3.16.7.

Figure 3.16.8.

Figure 3.16.9.

3.17. Korea, Rep.

After the analysis during 2000-2016 the model equations are:

  (488)    D(t)=C(t)+G(t)+I(t)+EX(t)-IM(t)

  (489)    C(t)=0.3598DI(t)+155972901964

  (490)    G(t)=0.4609TI(t)+33123563343

  (491)    TI(t)=TR(t)+OR(t)

  (492)    OR(t)=0.2058Y(t)-118249068206

  (493)    I(t)=0.2543Y(t)-145132992r(t)+69981622924

  (494)    DI(t)=Y(t)+TF(t)-TR(t)

  (495)    TF(t)=0.0704Y(t)+62262389648

  (496)    TR(t)=0.1458Y(t)-2961739019

  (497)    IM(t)=0.7687Y(t)-328791218697

  (498)    EX(t)=0.9641Y(t)-503130867407

  (499)    D(t)=Y(t)

  (500)    MD(t)=2.2287Y(t)-30718078124r(t)-1268086462846

  (501)    MS(t)=88914539140t-177665725834638

  (502)    MD(t)=MS(t)

Solving the equations (1)-(15) we find that at equilibrium (t” being the year):

  (503)    Y(t)=6358068730.49t-11821572222473.50

  (504)    r(t)=-2.4332t+4884.7887

  (505)    TI(t)=2234912037.67t-4276588042683.21

  (506)    G(t)=1030045448.16t-1937907051179.11

  (507)    DI(t)=5879254620.08t-10866087886305.70

  (508)    C(t)=2115493417.92t-3753899843382.67

  (509)    OR(t)=1308176139.93t-2550544057989.41

  (510)    TR(t)=926735897.74t-1726043984693.79

  (511)    TF(t)=447921787.33t-770559648525.97

  (512)    I(t)=1969764735.20t-3644749536276.53

  (513)    IM(t)=4887248771.43t-9415664413952.71

  (514)    EX(t)=6130013900.65t-11900680205588.00

  (515)    MD(t)=MS(t)=88914539140.34t-177665725834638.00

From the relationships (16)-(28) we can draw the following conclusions:

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of households” was registered in 2016 (122.79%) and the minimum in 2000 (84.04%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 48.09-52.64%.

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of the government” emphasizes that in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of the government” was registered in 2015 (135.15%) and the minimum in 2000 (69.22%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 13.78-15.05%.

The analysis of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2009, 2010 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Other revenues” was registered in 2013 (189.05%) and the minimum in 2000 (70.85%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 7.13-13.15%.

The analysis of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2009 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2009 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Investment” was registered in 2016 (129.71%) and the minimum in 2000 (84.24%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 29.62-34.01%.

The analysis of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Government transfers” was registered in 2012 (139.64%) and the minimum in 2016 (1.02%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 13.91-15.72%.

The analysis of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Tax revenue” was registered in 2015 (125.22%) and the minimum in 2001 (80.49%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 13.93-15.48%.

The analysis of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Broad money” was registered in 2000 (253.54%) and the minimum in 2009 (68.00%).

The analysis of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Exports” was registered in 2014 (156.42%) and the minimum in 2001 (57.24%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 42.30-57.10%.

The analysis of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Imports” was registered in 2016 (150.08%) and the minimum in 2001 (63.01%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 42.06-51.03%.

The analysis of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Trade balance” was registered in 2013 (477.53%) and the minimum in 2000 (-4629.30%).

The analysis of “Output” emphasizes that in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Output” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Output” was registered in 2016 (130.95%) and the minimum in 2000 (79.37%).

The analysis of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2006, 2007 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Real interest rate (%)” was registered in 2007 (319.26%) and the minimum in 2008 (-351.89%).

Figure 3.17.1.

Figure 3.17.2.

Figure 3.17.3.

Figure 3.17.4.

Figure 3.17.5.

Figure 3.17.6.

Figure 3.17.7.

Figure 3.17.8.

Figure 3.17.9.

Figure 3.17.10.

Figure 3.17.11.

Figure 3.17.12.

Figure 3.17.13.

Kuwait

After the analysis during 2000-2016 the model equations are:

  (516)    D(t)=C(t)+G(t)+I(t)+EX(t)-IM(t)

  (517)    C(t)=0.3554DI(t)-12215937448

  (518)    G(t)=-0.0344TI(t)+26055769006

  (519)    TI(t)=TR(t)+OR(t)

  (520)    OR(t)=0.6504Y(t)-11646253724

  (521)    I(t)=0.1462Y(t)+119321914r(t)+3037313823

  (522)    DI(t)=Y(t)+TF(t)-TR(t)

  (523)    TF(t)=1.2282Y(t)-193723330186

  (524)    TR(t)=0.0055Y(t)+522757006

  (525)    IM(t)=0.5317Y(t)-28105583018

  (526)    EX(t)=0.5949Y(t)+10431631639

  (527)    D(t)=Y(t)

  (528)    MD(t)=0.6638Y(t)+965738458r(t)+228245862

  (529)    MS(t)=4664310921t-9286616941336

  (530)    MD(t)=MS(t)

Solving the equations (1)-(15) we find that at equilibrium (t” being the year):

  (531)    Y(t)=5475006371.06t-11026739500220.70

  (532)    r(t)=1.0667t-2037.3412

  (533)    TI(t)=3591359657.48t-7244172138261.09

  (534)    G(t)=-123688596.66t+275549434686.20

  (535)    DI(t)=12169049777.72t-24702882748050.70

  (536)    C(t)=4324904180.01t-8791668960218.10

  (537)    OR(t)=3561209618.59t-7183972294734.37

  (538)    TR(t)=30150038.89t-60199843526.72

  (539)    TF(t)=6724193445.56t-13736343091356.70

  (540)    I(t)=927478268.43t-1851678925953.52

  (541)    IM(t)=2910897636.90t-5890694186301.26

  (542)    EX(t)=3257210156.18t-6549635235036.54

  (543)    MD(t)=MS(t)=4664310920.55t-9286616941336.33

From the relationships (16)-(28) we can draw the following conclusions:

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of households” was registered in 2010 (-33.82%) and the minimum in 2016 (-61.84%).

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of the government” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of the government” was registered in 2013 (96.13%) and the minimum in 2010 (73.40%).

The analysis of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Other revenues” was registered in 2001 (-61.16%) and the minimum in 2015 (-631.58%).

The analysis of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Investment” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Investment” was registered in 2010 (162.37%) and the minimum in 2012 (145.23%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 15.51-19.95%.

The analysis of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Government transfers” was registered in 2008 (53.85%) and the minimum in 2014 (-7.74%).

The analysis of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 is above the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Tax revenue” was registered in 2003 (620.70%) and the minimum in 2012 (209.17%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 0.66-0.96%.

The analysis of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2009, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2009 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Broad money” was registered in 2016 (129.87%) and the minimum in 2012 (81.27%).

The analysis of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2010 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Exports” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Exports” was registered in 2011 (14311.68%) and the minimum in 2010 (-2911.81%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 65.12-70.18%.

The analysis of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Imports” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Imports” was registered in 2010 (-88.05%) and the minimum in 2016 (-219.05%).

The analysis of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Trade balance” was registered in 2012 (139.27%) and the minimum in 2015 (110.59%).

The analysis of “Output” emphasizes that in 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Output” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Output” was registered in 2015 (2555.67%) and the minimum in 2014 (-178885.21%).

The analysis of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Real interest rate (%)” was registered in 2015 (36.48%) and the minimum in 2011 (-9.53%).

Figure 3.18.1.

Figure 3.18.2.

Figure 3.18.3.

Figure 3.18.4.

Figure 3.18.5.

Figure 3.18.6.

Figure 3.18.7.

Figure 3.18.8.

Figure 3.18.9.

Figure 3.18.10.

Figure 3.18.11.

 

3.19. Lebanon

After the analysis during 2000-2016 the model equations are:

  (544)    D(t)=C(t)+G(t)+I(t)+EX(t)-IM(t)

  (545)    C(t)=0.8050DI(t)+3182910004

  (546)    G(t)=0.2392TI(t)+3148858765

  (547)    TI(t)=TR(t)+OR(t)

  (548)    OR(t)=0.0411Y(t)+235281825

  (549)    I(t)=0.3413Y(t)+9819108r(t)-3747188170

  (550)    DI(t)=Y(t)+TF(t)-TR(t)

  (551)    TF(t)=0.1793Y(t)-1434309692

  (552)    TR(t)=0.1552Y(t)-173224473

  (553)    IM(t)=0.6267Y(t)-1563591573

  (554)    EX(t)=0.3737Y(t)-1920417382

  (555)    D(t)=Y(t)

  (556)    MD(t)=3.1992Y(t)+380582480r(t)-33186703477

  (557)    MS(t)=4723573081t-9410925019789

  (558)    MD(t)=MS(t)

Solving the equations (1)-(15) we find that at equilibrium (t” being the year):

  (559)    Y(t)=992222142.37t-1959871219785.00

  (560)    r(t)=4.0707t-8165.6596

  (561)    TI(t)=194757783.98t-384630199910.50

  (562)    G(t)=46576918.02t-88836626608.72

  (563)    DI(t)=1016180449.15t-2008455574580.41

  (564)    C(t)=818013377.64t-1613600339249.97

  (565)    OR(t)=40801593.61t-80357425808.91

  (566)    TR(t)=153956190.38t-304272774101.60

  (567)    TF(t)=177914497.15t-352857128897.01

  (568)    I(t)=378656993.34t-752910910665.60

  (569)    IM(t)=621831895.95t-1229827288149.32

  (570)    EX(t)=370806749.32t-734350631410.02

  (571)    MD(t)=MS(t)=4723573080.55t-9410925019788.80

From the relationships (16)-(28) we can draw the following conclusions:

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Actual final consumption of households” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of households” was registered in 2015 (112.37%) and the minimum in 2006 (86.90%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 85.64-92.67%.

The analysis of “Actual final consumption of the government” emphasizes that in 2001, 2002, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Actual final consumption of the government” was registered in 2016 (126.95%) and the minimum in 2008 (86.25%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 12.96-20.03%.

The analysis of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2006, 2010, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Other revenues” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2010 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Other revenues” was registered in 2014 (134.12%) and the minimum in 2000 (72.37%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 4.52-6.21%.

The analysis of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2015 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Investment” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Investment” was registered in 2009 (118.46%) and the minimum in 2006 (70.09%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 23.44-26.64%.

The analysis of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2000, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is above the equilibrium value and in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Government transfers” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Government transfers” was registered in 2008 (130.65%) and the minimum in 2003 (-21.66%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 13.09-18.05%.

The analysis of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2004, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Tax revenue” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Tax revenue” was registered in 2010 (125.03%) and the minimum in 2001 (71.00%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 14.19-16.86%.

The analysis of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2000, 2001, 2007, 2010, 2011, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2012, 2013 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Broad money” emphasizes that in 2010, 2011 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2009, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Broad money” was registered in 2000 (108.94%) and the minimum in 2013 (94.86%).

The analysis of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2015 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2014, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Exports” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Exports” was registered in 2010 (125.35%) and the minimum in 2000 (64.27%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 30.89-35.79%.

The analysis of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Imports” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Imports” was registered in 2010 (115.39%) and the minimum in 2000 (79.58%). The excess of equilibrium values is due, in the corresponding periods, to the large share of GDP, between 56.53-61.69%.

The analysis of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2001, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2011 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Trade balance” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008, 2011 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Trade balance” was registered in 2016 (125.50%) and the minimum in 2006 (70.90%).

The analysis of “Output” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Output” emphasizes that in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is above the equilibrium value and in 2008 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Output” was registered in 2010 (111.38%) and the minimum in 2006 (87.62%).

The analysis of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2006, 2007 is above the equilibrium value and in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 is below the equilibrium value. During the financial crisis (2008-2012), the behavior of “Real interest rate (%)” emphasizes that in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 is below the equilibrium value. The maximum ratio between real and equilibrium value of “Real interest rate (%)” was registered in 2006 (4000.98%) and the minimum in 2005 (-309.86%).

Figure 3.19.1.

Figure 3.19.2.

Figure 3.19.3.

Figure 3.19.4.

Figure 3.19.5.

Figure 3.19.6.

Figure 3.19.7.

Figure 3.19.8.

Figure 3.19.9.

Figure 3.19.10.

Figure 3.19.11.

Figure 3.19.12.

Figure 3.19.13.

 

References

Ioan C.A., Pusca A.C., Nuta F.M. & Ioan G. (coord.) (2019). Economic development models of emerging countries, Danubius Publishing, Galati.

Ioan C.A. & Ioan G. (2011). The Equilibrium Analysis of a Closed Economy Model with Government and Money Market Sector,Acta Universitatis Danubius, Oeconomica, nr.5, vol.7, pp.127-143

Ioan C.A., Ioan G. (2013). A Mathematical Model of an Open Economy with Applications in Romania, Acta Universitatis Danubius, Oeconomica, nr.5, vol.9, pp.103-170

Ioan C.A., Ioan G. (2016). An Equilibrium Model for the Romanian Economy, Journal of Accounting and Management, Nr.2, Vol.6, pp.41 – 75.

Romer David, Advanced Macroeconomics, 1996, McGraw-Hill

***, http://databank.worldbank.org/data/home.aspx.

***, https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/.



[1] Department of Economics, Danubius University of Galati, Romania, Correscponding author: catalin_angelo_ioan@univ-danubius.ro.

[2] Department of Economics Danubius University of Galati, Romania, E-mail: ginaioan@univ-danubius.ro.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.