Working Paper: NBER ID: w27153
Authors: William Easterly; Steven Pennings
Abstract: Previous literature suggests that leaders matter for growth in general. This paper asks which leaders matter and develops a methodology to estimate the growth contribution of individual leaders and calculate its precision. The findings show that few leaders have statistically significant contributions; it is difficult to know who is good for growth and who is not. The paper also finds that the most intuitive estimate of a leader’s contribution—the average growth rate during tenure—is largely useless for measuring his or her true contribution. Consequently, many leaders with statistically significant growth effects are surprises. Moreover, leaders in non-democratic countries are no more likely to be statistically significant than leaders in democratic ones.
Keywords: No keywords provided
JEL Codes: N10; O11; O43; O57
Edges that are evidenced by causal inference methods are in orange, and the rest are in light blue.
| Cause | Effect |
|---|---|
| leader tenure (M54) | growth contribution (O40) |
| leader quality (M54) | growth contribution (O40) |
| democratic regime (D72) | growth contribution (O40) |
| non-democratic regime (P26) | growth contribution (O40) |
| average growth rate during tenure (O41) | true leader effects (C92) |
| Seretse Khama (N97) | positive growth contribution (O49) |
| Raoul Cedras (Y70) | negative growth contribution (F62) |