Trust and economic growth: a robustness analysis

By Sjoerd Beugelsdijk. 2004

412 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Safety Research, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/86fa0e8bba9de2aba90f76b17392b7f0c31376b8

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Safety Research

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Better Rules or Stronger Communities? On the Social Foundations of Institutional Change and Its Economic Effects (2006, background): “Later research has found that proxies of community, such as group participation, are correlated with better economic performance (Knack and Keefer 1997; Zak and Knack 2001; Beugelsdijk, de Groot, and van Schaik 2004; Guiso, Sapienza, and Zingales 2004), or that, conversely, deep divisions between ”
Is Social Capital a Good Concept? (2012, neutral): “not least the effects on economic growth rates, have proved to be robust and highly important (cf. Knack and Keefer, 1997; Whiteley, 2000; Beugelsdijk et al., 2004).”
Does Trust Promote Growth (2013, methodology): “…growth theories naturally give rise to large uncertainty about which model represents the “correct” model of economic growth (Durlauf et al., 2008).1 Beugelsdijk et al. (2004) and Berggren et al. (2008) examine the effect of trust on growth using the original dataset of Zack and Knack (2001) and…”
Economics of Good and Evil: The Quest for Economic Meaning from Gilgamesh to Wall Street (2011, neutral): “New York: Oxford University Press, 2011, 384 pp.”
Is tolerance good or bad for growth? (2010, positive): “8On trust, see, e.g., Zak and Knack (2001), Beugelsdijk et al. (2004), Berggren et al. (2008) and Dincer and Uslaner (2010).”
Mountains in a flat world: Why proximity still matters for the location of economic activity (2008, background): “Other research has found that different institutional proxies of community, such as group participation, help explain higher economic performance (Knack and Keefer 1997; Zak and Knack 1998; Beugelsdijk et al. 2004; Guiso, Sapienza and Zingales 2004), or that, conversely, excessive divisions within s”
Trust and development (2009, methodology): “Beugelsdijk et al. (2004) verify the robustness of Zak and Knack’s results using the sample of 41 countries.”
Social capital vs institutions in the growth process (2009, background): “In a robustness analysis of Zak and Knack (2001), Beugelsdijk et al. (2004) find that the results are in general fairly robust, even when including some institutions-related measures (such as religion and political instability), but that the marginal impact of trust is greater in low-trust countri”
What Have We Learned About Generalized Trust, If Anything? (2008, positive): “…older and more recent studies claim that trust furthers economic prosperity and growth in society (e.g., Putnam 1993; Fukuyama 1995; Knack & Keefer 1997; Dasgupta & Serageldin 2000; Whiteley 2000; Zak & Knack 2001; Grootaert & van Bastelaer 2002; Uslaner 2002, p. 245; Beugelsdijk et al. 2004).”
Government Size and Growth: A Survey and Interpretation of the Evidence (2011, positive): “For a robustness analysis of the trust-growth relationship, see Beugelsdijk et al. (2004).”
How Does Social Trust Affect Economic Growth (2012, background): “Beugelsdijk et al. (2004), exposing the trust-growth association to various robustness exercises, find effects of a one standard deviation shock ranging from 1.”