• No results found

D(TO(-1)) -6.396712 13.19761 -0.484687 0.6349

D(TO(-2)) 23.40369 11.81249 1.981267 0.0662

CointEq(-1) -0.194786 0.076544 -2.544767 0.0224 Long Run Coefficient

TGE -113.0415 45.27839 -2.496589 0.0247

RER 0.845676 0.840872 1.005713 0.3305

TO 91.76089 99.63402 0.920979 0.3716

C -1863.958 1515.251 -1.230131 0.2376

Source: Data output via E-views 9.0

From Table 4.2.18, in both short and long run, total government expenditure has significant negative relationship with gross fixed capital formation. Real exchange rate and trade openness have insignificant negative relationship with gross fixed capital formation in the short run but positive in the long run.

4.2.19: The relationship between IMF conditionality and NS of Uganda

Table 4.2.19: ARDL Short and Long Run Relationship NS→TGE, RER and TO

Short Run Co-integrating Form

Variable Coefficient Std. Error t-Statistic Prob.

D(TGE) -8.055616 2.894256 -2.783312 0.0103

D(RER) -1.369776 0.366082 -3.741721 0.0010

D(TO) 12.74001 10.95173 1.163287 0.2561

CointEq(-1) 0.064134 0.072244 0.887736 0.3835 Long Run Coefficient

TGE 125.6062 144.5066 0.869207 0.3933

RER 0.920954 1.897343 0.485391 0.6318

TO -198.6469 250.1555 -0.794094 0.4349

C 506.2484 3648.005 0.138774 0.8908

Source: Data output via E-views 9.0

On the side of national savings, Table4.2.19 discloses that IMF conditionality: total government expenditure and real exchange rate have significant negative relationship with national savings of Uganda in the short run but insignificant positive relationship in the long

run. In the short run, trade openness was observe to have negatively related with national savings but positively in long run.

4.2.20: Effect of IMF Conditionality on Economic Growth of Uganda Restatement of Hypotheses for Uganda

1. H0: IMF conditionality albeit total government expenditure, real exchange rate and trade openness has no significant effect on gross domestic product of Uganda.

2. H0: IMF conditionality albeit total government expenditure, real exchange rate and trade openness has no significant effect on gross fixed capital of Uganda.

3. H0: IMF conditionality albeit total government expenditure, real exchange rate and trade openness has no significant effect on national savings of Uganda.

Table 4.2.20a: Granger Causality test result (Uganda)

Null Hypothesis: Obs F-Statistic Prob. Remarks

TGE does not Granger Cause GDP GDP does not Granger Cause TGE

30

0.00688 2.18534

0.9345 0.1509

No Causality No Causality RER does not Granger Cause GDP

GDP does not Granger Cause RER

30

0.57336 6.88176

0.4555 0.0141

No Causality Causality TO does not Granger Cause GDP

GDP does not Granger Cause TO

30

17.8766 0.04830

0.0002 0.8227

Causality No Causality TGE does not Granger Cause GFCF

GFCF does not Granger Cause TGE 30

0.08594 1.45177

0.7716 0.2387

No Causality No Causality RER does not Granger Cause GFCF

GFCF does not Granger Cause RER 30

0.16754 6.92597

0.6855 0.0139

No Causality Causality TO does not Granger Cause GFCF

GFCF does not Granger Cause TO

30

11.5563 0.10850

0.0021 0.7444

Causality No Causality TGE does not Granger Cause NS

NS does not Granger Cause TGE 30

0.06496 0.75776

0.8007 0.3917

No Causality No Causality RER does not Granger Cause NS

NS does not Granger Cause RER 30

3.35990 8.46269

0.0779 0.0072

No Causality Causality TO does not Granger Cause NS

NS does not Granger Cause TO

30

1.56286 0.07125

0.2220 0.7916

No Causality No Causality

Source: Data output via E-views 9.0

Table 4.2.20b: Summary Statistics – Testing Hypotheses (Uganda)

Hypothesis Variables F-statistic P-Value Decision Hypothesis 1 GDP → TGE, RER, TO

TGE 0.00688 0.9345 Accept H0

RER 0.57336 0.4555 Accept H0

TO 17.8766 0.0002 Reject H0

Hypothesis 2 GFCF → TGE, RER, TO

TGE 0.08594 0.7716 Accept H0

RER 0.16754 0.6855 Accept H0

TO 11.5563 0.0021 Reject H0

Hypothesis 3 NS → TGE, RER, TO

TGE 0.06496 0.8007 Accept H0

RER 3.35990 0.0779 Accept H0

TO 1.56286 0.2220 Accept H0

Source: Granger Causality Analysis Output from Table 4.2.20

With regard to the effect of IMF conditionality on growth fundamentals in Uganda all the null hypotheses were accepted indicating that IMF conditionality actually affected the economy of Uganda. However, Trade Openness exerts negative effect on GDP and GFCF of Uganda. Table 4.2.20 also unveils that IMF conditionality: total government expenditure, real exchange rate and trade openness have no significant effect on gross domestic product, gross fixed capital formation and national savings. Gross domestic product and gross fixed capital formation were observed to have been significantly influenced by trade openness. The mechanism of gross domestic product, gross fixed capital formation and national savings in Uganda determine real exchange rate as IMF conditionality.

4.2.21 Sub Saharan African Nations Panel Co-integration Test/Long Run Relationship The panel unit root test through LLC and Breitung unit root test in Tables 4.1.3, to 4.1.8 affirm the stationarity of the variable at first difference thus testing the co-integration equilibrium relationship between the variables of interest is justified. Kao’s residual and Johansen Fisher panel co-integration were the two structure of panel analysis co-integration that was employed. The results of the Kao’s residual co-integration test for the models are summarized in Table 35, while that of Johansen Fisher panel co-integration is highlighted in Tables 36 – 38.

4.2.21.1 Kao Residual Co-integration Test Table 4.2.21.1 Kao Residual Co-integration Test

Models Argumented Dickey-Fuller Decision t-Statistic Prob.

GDPSSAN → TGE, RER, TO -7.757076 0.0045 Reject H0

GFCFSSAN → TGE, RER, TO -8.466490 0.0004 Reject H0

NSSSAN → TGE, RER, TO -6.819085 0.0464 Reject H0

Source: Computer output data using E-views 9.0

Notes: The ADF is the residual-based ADF statistic. The null hypothesis is no co-integration. (*) and (**) indicate that the estimated parameters are significant at the 1% and 5% level respectively

Kao panel co-integration is a follow up of the Engle-Granger co-integration mechanism. The Kao co-integration test has two tests statistics: Dickey-Fuller types test and Argumented Dickey-Fuller type test. Table 4.2.21.1 divulges that the p-values of the t-statistic for the three models are significant at 5% level of significance thus the null hypothesis of no co-integration is rejected. With this as the case, there is a clear long run equilibrium relationship between gross domestic product, gross fixed capital formation, national savings of Sub Saharan African nations and International Monetary Fund conditionality.

4.2.21.2 Johansen Fisher Panel Co-integration

In the estimation of the long run relationship between variables of interest using the Johansen Fisher co-integration, two approaches are considered to make inference:

likelihood ratio trace statistics and maximum eigenvalue statistics. Johansen Fisher panel co-integration is a follow up of the conventional Johansen’s time-series co-co-integration test where mixed order of integration is allowed or considered. This is to say in essence that possible bias by virtue that all variables are not integrated in the same order is perfectly taking into consideration. The addition of the Johansen Fisher panel co-integration is to further authenticate the outcome of the Kao’s residual co-integration test depicted in Table 4.2.21.1

Table 4.2.21.2: GDPSSAN → TGE, RER, TO Johansen Fisher Panel Co-integration Test

Unrestricted Co-integration Rank Test (Trace and Maximum Eigen Value) Hypothesized

Number of CE(s)

Fisher’s Stat.

(from Trace Test)

Prob.** Fisher’s Stat. (from Maximum Eigen Test)

Prob.**

None 38.95*** 0.0000 26.51*** 0.0031

At most 1 19.20 0.0378 16.60 0.0837

At most 2 10.14 0.4287 6.420 0.7788

At most 3 18.20 0.0517 18.20 0.0517

Source: Computer output data using E-views 9.0

Notes: P-values are computed using asymptotic Chi-square distribution. *** indicate that the test statistics are significant at the 1% level. Fisher’s test applies regardless

of the dependent variable.

Table 4.2.21.3: GFCFN → TGE, RER, TO Johansen Fisher Panel Co-integration Test

Unrestricted Co-integration Rank Test (Trace and Maximum Eigen Value) Hypothesized

Number of CE(s)

Fisher’s Stat.

(from Trace Test)

Prob.** Fisher’s Stat. (from Maximum Eigen Test)

Prob.**

None 32.51*** 0.0003 30.57*** 0.0007

At most 1 10.76 0.3768 10.88 0.3670

At most 2 5.234 0.8750 4.870 0.8997

At most 3 10.08 0.4336 10.08 0.4336

Source: Computer output data using E-views 9.0

Notes: P-values are computed using asymptotic Chi-square distribution. *** indicate that the test statistics are significant at the 1% level. Fisher’s test applies regardless

of the dependent variable.

Table 4.2.21.4: NSSSAN → TGE, RER, TO Johansen Fisher Panel Co-integration Test

Unrestricted Co-integration Rank Test (Trace and Maximum Eigen Value) Hypothesized

Number of CE(s)

Fisher’s Stat.

(from Trace Test)

Prob.** Fisher’s Stat. (from Maximum Eigen Test)

Prob.**

None 27.95*** 0.0018 23.15*** 0.0102

At most 1 12.69 0.2414 12.14 0.2758

At most 2 6.734 0.7503 4.375 0.9289

At most 3 13.76 0.1843 13.76 0.1843

Source: Computer output data using E-views 9.0

Notes: P-values are computed using asymptotic Chi-square distribution. *** indicate that the test statistics are significant at the 1% level. Fisher’s test applies regardless

of the dependent variable.

The result of the Johansen’s Fisher panel co-integration test as presented in Tables 4.2.21.2-4.2.21.3 for the three models envisage the presence of one co-integrating equation each at the 1% significant level. The test of co-integration using the two panel co-integration tools: Kao co-integration (Table 4.2.21.1) and Johansen Fisher co-integration (Tables 4.2.21.2-4.2.21.4) affirm the presence of a long run relationship between International Monetary Fund conditionality and economic growth of selected Sub Saharan African countries with respect to gross domestic product, gross fixed capital formation and national savings.

4.2.22 Nature of Sub Saharan African Nations Panel Co-integration/Long Run