This document discusses Ramesh Paudel's paper on export performance in landlocked developing countries. It summarizes the paper's objective to examine export determinants in landlocked countries and compare their performance to other developing countries. The analysis uses an augmented gravity model specification with cross-country data from 1995-2010, estimating models with different econometric methods. Key results found landlocked developing countries had poorer export performance than other developing countries, distance deterred exports, and African landlocked countries performed similarly to other landlocked countries. However, the discussant raises some issues with the model specification and inconsistencies in the econometric results. In conclusion, while the paper contributes to understanding landlocked country exports, some determinants appeared obvious and results

1. Export
Performance
on
Landlocked
Developing
Countries:
A
Discussion
on
Ramesh
Paudel’s
Paper
By
Manoj
K.
Pandey

2. About
the
Paper
Objec&ve
is
to
examine
the
determinants
of
export
performance
in
landlocked
developing
countries
and
compare
these
performances
with
other
developing
countries

3. Approach
1. Augumented
Gravity
Model
Specifica&on:
Ln(Xij,t)=F(Ln(GDPi,t),
Ln(GDPj,t),
Ln(Disij),
RERi,t,
Ln(PCGDPi,t),
Ln(PCGDPj,t),
D_LANij,t,
D_BORij,t
,
Rela&ve
Factor
Endowmenti,t,
D_Openi,t,
AFLLOCKj,t)
2. Focus
only
on
Non-­‐oil
exports
for
Landlocked
and
other
developing
countries

4. Approach
3.
Empirical
Evidences:
Cross-­‐country
data
from
developing
countries
over
the
period
1995-­‐2010
(15
year
panel)
4.
Econometric
methods:
POLS,
RE,
FE,
Hausman
and
Taylor
IV
(HT),
Poisson
Pseudo
Maximum
Likelihood
(PPML)

5. Key
Results
1. LLDCs’
export
performance
seems
poor
as
compared
to
ODCs.
2. Among
LLDCs’,
export
performance
ma`er
more
to
the
poorer
countries
3. Distance
deter
the
exports
4. African
LLDCs
are
at
par
with
other
LLDCs

6. Grey
Areas
A.
Use
of
Proper
model
specificaIon
1. Mo&va&on
behind
choice
of
only
non-­‐oil
exports
is
not
very
clear?
2. Popula&on
of
export
countries
and
their
partner
countries
are
not
included
(supply
and
demand
side)??
3. Why
Log
of
GDP
and
Log
of
PCGDP
are
used
together
in
the
same
model?
Mathema&cally,
log(GDP)
and
log(GDP/Popula&on)
is
connected
as
b1
log(GDP)
+b2
log(GDP/Popula&on)
=(b1+b2)log(GDP)
-­‐b2log(Pop)
4. Table
7,
8:
why
interac&on
of
landlocked
dummy
and
GDP
of
own
country
and
GDP
of
partner
country
are
not
used
together
in
the
model?

7. Grey
Areas
B.
Econometric
Results
1. RFE
=|Import
Country
GDP-­‐Export
Country
GDP|??
In
Table
7,
I
am
not
sure
how
to
explain
–ve
sign
of
RFE?
2. Table
8,
signs
of
percapita
GDP
is
not
same
in
HT
(+ve)
AND
PPML
(-­‐ve).
Why
it
is
so?
3. Table
9,
what
is
the
actual
(aier
adjus&ng
interac&on
term)
coefficient
of
Landlocked
dummy
in
4th
PPML
model?
4. Table
10,
sign
of
partner’s
per
capita
GDP
is
not
consistent
in
different
models’

8. Final
Comment
The
paper
contributes
to
the
empirical
literature
by
using
Gravity
model
framework
to
examine
determinants
of
Non-­‐oil
exports
and
compare
performances
of
LLDC’s
with
the
ODCs
based
on
panel
data
econometric
methods.
However,
most
of
the
determinants
look
obvious,
some
of
results
are
not
robust
and
overall
the
paper
lacks
in-­‐depth
analysis
on
the
policy
front.

9. Thank
You