《营商环境报告》的指标有多准确?太平洋岛屿案例研究

IF 1.4 3区 社会学 Q1 AREA STUDIES Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies Pub Date : 2020-10-13 DOI:10.1002/app5.313
Paul Holden, Alma Pekmezovic
{"title":"《营商环境报告》的指标有多准确?太平洋岛屿案例研究","authors":"Paul Holden,&nbsp;Alma Pekmezovic","doi":"10.1002/app5.313","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>While there have been several attempts to measure the investment climate, by far the most widely recognised measure is the World Bank's <i>Doing Business</i> indicators (DBIs), ranking some 200 countries on their ease of doing business. Methodological criticisms have failed to dent their stature. This article is based on case studies of Pacific Island countries that demonstrate that identical reforms in different countries are assigned rankings so widely divergent that they call into question the validity of the DBIs. The findings cast doubt on targeting improved DBI rankings as a policy goal. Our case studies are the first to provide detailed country evidence supporting the criticisms levelled against the DBIs on conceptual grounds.</p>","PeriodicalId":45839,"journal":{"name":"Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/app5.313","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How accurate are the Doing Business indicators? A Pacific Island case study\",\"authors\":\"Paul Holden,&nbsp;Alma Pekmezovic\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/app5.313\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>While there have been several attempts to measure the investment climate, by far the most widely recognised measure is the World Bank's <i>Doing Business</i> indicators (DBIs), ranking some 200 countries on their ease of doing business. Methodological criticisms have failed to dent their stature. This article is based on case studies of Pacific Island countries that demonstrate that identical reforms in different countries are assigned rankings so widely divergent that they call into question the validity of the DBIs. The findings cast doubt on targeting improved DBI rankings as a policy goal. Our case studies are the first to provide detailed country evidence supporting the criticisms levelled against the DBIs on conceptual grounds.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45839,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/app5.313\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/app5.313\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AREA STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/app5.313","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

虽然有几项衡量投资环境的尝试,但迄今为止最广泛认可的衡量标准是世界银行的营商环境指标(DBIs),该指标对约200个国家的营商环境进行了排名。方法论上的批评未能削弱他们的地位。本文基于对太平洋岛屿国家的案例研究,这些研究表明,不同国家的相同改革被分配的排名差异如此之大,以至于它们引发了对dbi有效性的质疑。研究结果对将提高DBI排名作为政策目标提出了质疑。我们的案例研究首次提供了详细的国家证据,以支持从概念上对dbi提出的批评。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
How accurate are the Doing Business indicators? A Pacific Island case study

While there have been several attempts to measure the investment climate, by far the most widely recognised measure is the World Bank's Doing Business indicators (DBIs), ranking some 200 countries on their ease of doing business. Methodological criticisms have failed to dent their stature. This article is based on case studies of Pacific Island countries that demonstrate that identical reforms in different countries are assigned rankings so widely divergent that they call into question the validity of the DBIs. The findings cast doubt on targeting improved DBI rankings as a policy goal. Our case studies are the first to provide detailed country evidence supporting the criticisms levelled against the DBIs on conceptual grounds.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
5.30%
发文量
19
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies is the flagship journal of the Crawford School of Public Policy at The Australian National University. It is a peer-reviewed journal that targets research in policy studies in Australia, Asia and the Pacific, across a discipline focus that includes economics, political science, governance, development and the environment. Specific themes of recent interest include health and education, aid, migration, inequality, poverty reduction, energy, climate and the environment, food policy, public administration, the role of the private sector in public policy, trade, foreign policy, natural resource management and development policy. Papers on a range of topics that speak to various disciplines, the region and policy makers are encouraged. The goal of the journal is to break down barriers across disciplines, and generate policy impact. Submissions will be reviewed on the basis of content, policy relevance and readability.
期刊最新文献
The Impact of Parental Health Shocks on Child Schooling and Labour: Evidence From Thailand Price and Non-Price Factors in Development of Rice Cultivation: Case Studies From Southern India and Mekong-Delta Vietnam Do Political Relations Colour Chinaʼs Trade With Southeast Asian Partners? A Vector Autoregression Approach Challenging colonial logics of habit in Australiaʼs economic statecraft with Pacific Islands Investorsʼ view of mandatory corporate social responsibility as a public policy: The case of section 135 of the Indian Companies Act 2013
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1