Journal of Economics, Finance and Management (JEFM)

ISSN: 2958-7360
Vol. 3, No. 2, April 2024
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license.

Trade Openness and Inclusive Growth in Morocco :

Challenges and Opportunities in a Post-Pandemic
World
AYASS Hamza (Doctoral Student)
Department of Economic Sciences, Laboratory of Applied Economics (LAE), FSJES Agdal,
University Mohammed V of Rabat, Morocco

ZOUIRI Hassane (Teacher – Researcher)

Department of Economic Sciences, Laboratory of Applied Economics (LAE), FSJES Agdal,
University Mohammed V of Rabat, Morocco

ZINEELABIDINE Maroua (Doctor)

Department of Management Sciences, Laboratory of Studies and Research in Management
Sciences, FSJES Agdal, University Mohammed V of Rabat, Morocco

Abstract: This study aims to determine the impacts of trade openness on economic growth in
Morocco, following the SVAR approach by (Blanchard and Perotti, 2002) and using impulse response
functions over the period 1990-2020. The results indicate that trade openness has an insignificant
effect on economic growth in the country, in the sense that a positive shock to the degree of openness
of 1% has a timid effect on economic growth. The nature of the relationship between trade openness
and economic growth is justified by different external economic shocks. Therefore, Morocco has
experienced the establishment of a trade liberalization policy in the face of a macroeconomic
framework that is often unstable due to the non-diversification of the country's exports and the
concentration only on a few limited sectors. In addition, the existence of certain barriers and obstacles
has cooperated to disrupt the freedom of trade between Morocco and the outside world including the
financial crisis of 2008 (GFC) and recently the health crisis of COVID-19. Accordingly policy makers
need to integrate multiple institutional, macroeconomic, human, and financial factors to achieve a
model that can drive post-COVID-19 economic activity.

Keywords : Economic growth ; Trade openness ; COVID- 19 shock ; Morocco ; SVAR.

JEL Classification : C22, F14 , F43, O11.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11088348

http://journal-efm.fr 470
 Journal of Economics, Finance and Management (JEFM) - ISSN: 2958-7360

1. Introduction

The increasing of income inequality over the past three decades has presented a serious challenge to
policymakers all across the world (IMF, 2007 ; Stiglitz, 2013 ; Topuz,S.G, 2022 ; Cerra et al., 2022).
To promoting inclusive growth the nexus between openness to trade and economic growth has sparked
many debates ongoing in empirical and theoretical in the academic fields (Lucas, 1988 ; Grossman &
Helpman, 1990 ; 1991a ; 1991b ; Romer, 1990 ; Rivera-Batiz & Romer, 1991 ; Young, 1991 ; Sachs &
Warner, 1995 ; Harrison, 1996 ; Edwards, 1998 ; Frankel & Romer,1999 ; Dollar & Kraay, 2004;
Wang et al., 2004 , Zarra - Nezhad et al. 2014 ; Keho, 2017 ; Agyei & Idan, 2022).

During the last three years, global trade has been greatly influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic
(UNCTAD, 2021a). To achieve this, in comparison with the recent crisis, the decline in global trade
in 2020 was close to that during the global financial crisis of 2008/09 and substantially worse than that
during the recession in 2015. Overall, global trade declined by about $2.5 trillion in 2020 (or by about
9 per cent compared with the level in 2019). The effect of the pandemic on trade has been executed
with varying degrees. At an aggregate level, during the pandemic, trade trends were similar in the least
developed countries, developing countries and developed countries. In general, economies in East
Asia were the first to experience declines in trade and the first to recover (Shujiro, 2022). In contrast,
in developing economies in the rest of Asia, the effects were particularly detrimental to trade, with the
value of exports declining by more than 50 per cent in 2020. Pandemic-related disruptions also
resulted in a sharp decline in exports from Africa and Latin America in 2020, aggravated by a decline
in commodity prices (UNCTAD, 2022).

In 2020, Morocco experienced the most severe economic recession in its recent history, with real GDP
contracting by 7.2 percent (HCP, 2021) , This is due to the abnormal agricultural production
conditions that the country has experienced and the COVID-19, a global health crisis, caused
significant major social, economic, and political upheavals both external and domestic demand,
particularly in a key sectors of Morocco’s economy such as tourism and trade sector (World Bank,
2020).

The Pandemic World crisis highlighted the pivotal role of the State, both at the national and
international levels. For this purpose, our paper aims to examine empirically the effects of trade
openness on economic growth in Morocco for the period 1990-2020 to challenge public policy for
resilience and growth in the Post-COVID-19 World. The paper is organized as follow The first part
reviews the theoretical and empirical literature. The second part presents the procedure of the
empirical analysis and discussions around the results.

http://journal-efm.fr 471
 Journal of Economics, Finance and Management (JEFM) - ISSN: 2958-7360

2. Literature review

• Theoretical framework
The crucial role of commercial openness has been established by the founding father of the classical
current, (Adam Smith, 1976) by introducing his famous theory of absolute advantages, the author has
shown that countries with a low cost of production of a given product can specialize in the product and
participate in international trade, this theory may have created a limit in the sense that countries have
no absolute advantage cannot export their products and will therefore be condemned to autarky,
something that prompted (David Ricardo, 1817) to prolong the analysis by his theory of comparative
advantages. According to the author, each country has an interest in exporting the goods for which it
has a comparative advantage, in other words, a lower opportunity cost than other countries. This
theory was supported by the work of the Swedish school represented by (Heckscher & Ohlin, 1933),
with emphasis on endowment in terms of production factors as a comparative advantage.

Besides, new endogenous growth models explain a positive relationship between trade openness and
economic growth, with a focus on the long-term implications of government intervention in trade.
They stipulate that innovation is a catalyst for growth and encourages opening policy, insofar as gains
in free trade come mainly from the research and development aspect. In this context, the innovation
generated helps to boost the stock of knowledge and technology transfer (Grossman & Helpman,
1990 ; 1991a ; 1991b ; Romer, 1990 ; Rivera-Batiz & Romer, 1991). From this perspective (Levine &
Renelt, 1992) adds that trade openness can drive economic growth through investment, which
promotes long-term growth through the attraction of foreign investment, and which, according to the
authors, will lead to a decline in domestic investment due to fierce international competition.

Therefore, some researchers argue that commercial openness cannot create an explanatory link with
economic growth, because some developing countries will be expected to specialize in less productive
sectors, which destabilizes growth (Krugman, 1987; Lucas, 1988 ; Young, 1991 ; Acemoglu &
Zilibotti, 2001 ; Banerjee & Newman, 2003). In this context, economists recommend protectionist
trade policies at least temporarily to protect emerging industries.

Moreover, theoretical studies has not succeeded in deciding on a favourable or unfavourable effect of
trade openness on economic growth. The results vary based on each model used, depending on the
sample and the characteristics of the countries chosen. On the other hand, empirical work has revealed
complementary results and identified a positive effect of openness on growth see (Feder, 1983 ;
Balassa, 1985 ; Harrison, 1996 ; Edwards, 1998 ; Barro & Sala-I-Martin, 1995 ; Sachs & Warner
,1995 ; Rodriguez & Rodrik, 2000 ; Wang et al., 2004 ; Das & Paul, 2011 ; Zarra - Nezhad et al., 2014
; Keho, 2017 ; Wiredu et al., 2020 ; Oppong et al., 2022 ; Agyei & Idan, 2022).

http://journal-efm.fr 472
 Journal of Economics, Finance and Management (JEFM) - ISSN: 2958-7360

• Empirical studies
On the empirical front, a growing body of literature has examined the link between trade and
economic growth. However, the evidence from (Frankel & Romer, 1999) investigate the trade-growth
nexus by using an instrumental variable method, incorporating geographic characteristics (the
proximity of one country to other countries and the size of the country). The authors state that
international trade has a crucial and significant impact on growth. In further research (Brueckner &
Lederman, 2015) employed the instrumental variable approach with a panel of 41 Sub-Saharan
African countries. They find that trade openness affecting positively economic growth both in the
short and long run. In the same area, (Lawal et al., 2016) employ the ARDL methodology in Nigeria
and find a positive long-run impact of trade openness and financial development on economic growth.

Nearly, (Iyoha & Okim , 2017) discussed the impact of trade on economic growth in the ECOWAS
region. via the pooled ordinary least square (OLS), the fixed effect model, the fandom effect model,
and the dynamic panel regression model, their results stipulate that exports were consistently
positively related to growth. They also found that the four regression equations had high coefficients
of determination and F-statistic.

Along the same lines, (Agbahoungba et al.,2018) using the Generalized method of moments (GMM)
on a panel of 12 ECOWAS countries over the period (1996-2016), their results indicate a negative and
significant relationship between the trade ratio and economic growth. According to the authors, the
current level of foreign trade is not a proven source of economic growth in the ECOWAS area. In
terms of economic policy implications, the study suggests better participation in international trade for
Member States with a careful analysis of the structure of goods traded including imports.

Additionally, (Nketiah et al., 2019) examine Ghana's economic growth in the years following
liberalization, from 1975 to 2017, by investigating the relationship between foreign direct investment,
openness to trade, and economic growth. The Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) test for unit root,
regression analysis, descriptive analysis, and Pearson correlation was applied. The results show that
trade openness is the main factor affecting Ghana’s economic growth (annual %).

In this field of research Wiredu et al. (2020) also determine the effects of trade openness and foreign
direct investment (FDI) on economic growth measured by Gross Domestic Product (GDP). For a
committee comprising representatives from four West African nations (Côte d'Ivoire, Ghana, Nigeria,
and Senegal) over the period 1998-2017. The evidence from the statistical analysis suggests that trade
openness impact positively and significantly the economic growth in the whole sample.

http://journal-efm.fr 473
 Journal of Economics, Finance and Management (JEFM) - ISSN: 2958-7360

Recently, (Oppong et al., 2022) use four variables such as inflation, real exchange, and investment to
study the impact on economic growth in Ghana and Nigeria by using panel data from 1998 to 2017.
The results show that trade openness and real exchange rate positively and significantly impact
economic growth using the random effect. In contrast, inflation and investment have an insignificant
impact on economic growth using Random effect estimated models.

More recently, The study of (Agyei & Idan, 2022) seeks to cast light on the role of institutions in the
trade openness and inclusive growth nexus in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) in particular 39 SSA
countries from 1996 to 2017. By employing the System General Method of Moment estimation
technique (GMM). The study findings unveiled that institutions strengthen the positive relationship
between trade openness and inclusive growth in SSA. According to the authors Economies in SSA
should put in policies to strengthen their institutions to improve the positive link between trade
openness and inclusive growth. Similar conclusions were achieved in the works of (Rodrik et al.,
2004) who revealed that higher institutional framework could boost trade openness and economic
growth nexus among East Asian countries.

In consequence, On the empirical front, studies on trade opening and economic growth have been
widely examined. There are large numbers of empirical studies on the correlation between trade and
economic growth which have reported that trade has a strong positive impact on economic growth see
(Sachs & Warner, 1995 ; Harrison, 1996 ; Edwards, 1998 ; Frankel & Romer, 1999 ; Rodriguez &
Rodrik, 2000 ; Wang et al., 2004 ; Das & Paul, 2011 ; Zarra - Nezhad et al., 2014 ; Brueckner &
Lederman, 2015 ; Lawal et al., 2016 ; Keho, 2017 ; Iyoha & Okim, 2017 ; Agbahoungba et al., 2018
; Nketiah et al., 2019 ; Wiredu et al., 2020 ; Oppong et al., 2022 ; Agyei & Idan, 2022). Their focus
was on policy interpretation variables, particularly those related to trade and to further clarify the
existing ambiguity in the literature between trade and economic growth. The majority of their studies
contribute to the creation of innovative models for trade and economic growth.

3. Data and Methodology

Since the work of Sims (1980), the use of VARs has become very famous in Macroeconomics,
However, there is abundant literature on the effects of monetary policy in such a context. Our
empirical approach, on the other hand, relies on a structural VAR analysis, which is robust for
examining the effects of integration shocks on economic growth. In particular, the identification of
Trade openness shocks on economic growth in Morocco over the period 1990-2020. The empirical
investigation is inspired from the methodology originally proposed by (Blanchard and Perotti, 2002)
which revisited the discussion on the efficacy of fiscal policy by analyzing how taxes and shocks to
public spending affect macroeconomic performance. The choice of the period concerned is justified by
the transition from the Moroccan economy to a market economy in the 1990s. The following model is
inspired from (Blanchard and Perotti, 2002) equation :

http://journal-efm.fr 474
 Journal of Economics, Finance and Management (JEFM) - ISSN: 2958-7360

𝑨𝒀𝒕 = ∑ 𝑪𝒌 𝒀𝒕−𝒌 𝑩𝑼𝒕

𝒌=𝟏

Où 𝒀𝒕 : is the vector of endogenous variables that includes annual data namely the rate of growth of
real GDP per capita, the rate of trade opening, and financial development, the latter is measured by the
private loans granted by the banks over the period 1990-2020.
𝑨 : is a size matrix (n, n) representing the simultaneity relationships between the variables of 𝒀𝒕 .
𝑼𝒕 : is the vector of structural shocks that are assumed to be independently and identically distributed,
they are also orthogonal.
Based on the literature review around the research topic and in order to examine the effect of trade
openness on economic growth we have considering that GDP growth as the dependent variable while
Trade openness and Financial development are independent variables.
Table 1: Description and source of variables
Variables Significations Period Data Sources
GDP per capita growth (annual %) : The
annual percentage growth rate of GDP World Bank
𝐓𝐒𝐆𝐃𝐏 per capita based on constant local
1990-2020
database
currency
Opening rate (In % per year ) :
World Bank
𝐎𝐏𝐄𝐍 Measures Exports plus imports as a 1990-2020
database
share of GDP

Financial development is approximated World Bank

𝐃𝐅𝐈𝐍𝐀𝐍𝐂 by domestic credits to private sector by 1990-2020
database
banks (% of GDP)
Source: Developed by the authors from World Bank database.

4. Empirical result
a) Augmented Dickey-Fuller test for unit root

We investigate the time series properties of our variables. In the first step, we test for the existence of
unit roots. Standard augmented Dickey-Fuller (Dickey and Fuller, 1979) tests indicate that there is a
unit root in the level of GDP per capita growth (annual %). While trade openness and financial
development are not stationary in level, after estimating it in the first difference trade openness
becomes stationary, and the same for financial development which seems stationary after starting the
second difference.

http://journal-efm.fr 475
 Journal of Economics, Finance and Management (JEFM) - ISSN: 2958-7360

Table 2 : ADF unit root test

ADF test results at 5% level
Dickey-Fuller Augmented Stationarity
Variables (ADF)

Critical value t-statistic Order of Integration

TSGDP -3,50 -4,0117 I(0)
OPEN -3,50 -4,247 I(1)
DFINANC -3,50 -5,2929 I(2)
Source : Developed by the authors using R software

In the next step, we therefore test for co-integration using the Johansen test (Johansen 1995)
Consequently, we could not specify a vector error correction model (VECM), especially when the
variables are not stationary of the same order, besides, the cointegration relationship in the sense of
Granger is not justified, Structural vector autoregression (SVAR) is the most suitable model for our
study.

b) Granger (1969) Causality Test

This test is based on the study of the causal relationships between the variables, it allows one to detect
which is the variable that causes the other. The results of this test indicate that trade openness and
financial development do not cause economic growth in the sense of Granger as shown by the
probabilities of this test which are high about the 5% level. On the other hand, GDP per capita growth
(annual %) causes trade openness and financial development.

c) Impulse Responses Function

The simulation of structural shocks is based on a relevant approach in the analysis of the dynamics of
a set of variables. They project the response over time of variables to identify contemporary shocks.
We will trace the responses to the residual shocks of the variables studied over 20 years, as long as this
period represents the time needed for these variables to return to their long-term level. All shocks are
standardized to 1% and therefore the vertical axis indicates the percentage of the approximate variance
of economic growth in response to 1% shock on other variables. The results of this test show us the
following reactions :

Figure 1 : Response of Economic growth (TSGDP) from trade openness (DOPEN) Shock

http://journal-efm.fr 476
 Journal of Economics, Finance and Management (JEFM) - ISSN: 2958-7360

Source: Developed by the authors using R software

A positive 1% degree of trade openness shock has a significant positive effect and a very sensitive
effect on economic growth. In other words, following a 1% increase in trade openness, it can be seen
that this change has covered only a small or fragile change, and then it has faded quickly. It can be
concluded from this observation that economic growth is not determined structurally and significantly
by trade openness in the long term. This outcome differs with writers like as (Sachs & Warner, 1995 ;
Harrison, 1996 ; Edwards, 1998 ; Frankel & Romer, 1999 ; Rodriguez & Rodrik, 2000 ; Wang et al.,
2004 ; Das & Paul, 2011 ; Zarra - Nezhad et al., 2014 ; Brueckner & Lederman, 2015 ; Lawal et al.,
2016 ; Keho, 2017 ; Iyoha & Okim, 2017 ; Agbahoungba et al., 2018 ; Nketiah et al., 2019 ; Wiredu
et al., 2020 ; Oppong et al., 2022 ; Agyei & Idan, 2022) which shed light on the pivotal role of trade
on economic growth.

This finding is justified by the introduction of a trade liberalization policy in the face of an often
unstable macroeconomic environment due to the lack of diversification of Moroccan exports and the
concentration only on limited sectors such as industries «Phosphates and derivatives» ; «Agriculture
and Food Processing» and «Textile-Leather». In addition, the existence of certain barriers and
obstacles have contributed to disrupting trade freedom between Morocco and the rest of the world,
including the 2008 financial crisis and the recent COVID-19 pandemic.

The literature suggests that well-designed structural reforms can have meaningful effects on potential
output growth, there is substantial uncertainty with regard to the magnitude and timing of their impact
on economic activity and welfare (Bouis & Duval 2011 ; Duval & Furceri 2018 ; Acemoglu et al.
2019 ; October 2023 Regional Economic Outlook : Middle East and Central Asia).

http://journal-efm.fr 477
 Journal of Economics, Finance and Management (JEFM) - ISSN: 2958-7360

It should be noted that Morocco launched a new wave of structural reforms in the wake of the
pandemic to address lower growth since the mid-2000s, still high informality, elevated youth
unemployment, and low female labor market participation. The country’s New Model of
Development, 2021 report , aims to boost private sector investment, strengthen human capital
accumulation, enhance women’s participation in economic life, improve the social protection system,
and reinforce the governance of public institutions (Cardarelli & Koranchelian, 2023).

In addition, the NDM report outlines a new development model, sets out a national ambition by 2035,
including a comprehensive reform of social protection programs, an overhaul of the health and
education systems, a new strategy to deal with water scarcity, and several measures to strengthen the
business climate by improving the private sector and reduce the role of the state in the public
investment.

Figure 2 : Response of Economic growth (TSGDP) from financial development (DDFINANC) Shock

Source : Developed by the authors using R software

In this framework, a positive 1% degree of financial development shock has a negative and non-
significant effect on economic growth in the long term. This finding is contradictory to the remarks of
(Mc Kinnon & Shaw, 1973), who highlighted the crucial role of the financial system as an effective
means of boosting economic growth through a channel of transmission of positive real interest rates.
The relationship between finance and economic growth has been treated in serval studies (Mc Kinnon
& Shaw, 1973 ; King & Levine, 1993 ; Beck et al., 2000) other empirical studies have considered the
effect of financial inclusion on inclusive growth (Abor et al., 2018 ; Corrado & Corrado, 2017 ;
Demirguc-Kunt et al., 2017 ; Agyei & Idan, 2022).

When it comes to the financial development in Morocco. The latter question is much debated on the
empirical front ( Jung et al., 2014 ; Anser et al., 2021 ; Sekali & Bouzahzah, 2021). Actually the
Moroccan government has modernized the banking industry since the 1990s by implementing
significant changes that guarantee efficient deposit mobilization and efficient reinjection of these

http://journal-efm.fr 478
 Journal of Economics, Finance and Management (JEFM) - ISSN: 2958-7360

funds to support the country's economy. Recently the financial recession have coincided with the
outbreak of pandemic world known as COVID-19. In this regard pandemic world has obstructed
economic activities and financial transactions, leading to high volatility in the stock prices (Fallahgoul
2020 ; Procacci et al., 2020) also the entrepreneurial activities have been distressed which affects the
debt market, causing a global conjuncture financial crisis to emerge (Brown & Rocha, 2020).
Therefore, it may be necessary for Morocco to make different policy efforts to achieve steady
economic growth in the long run.

Given the previous background, the new dynamic to be instilled in private investment could be based
on the role of the Mohammed VI Investment Fund in financing productive diversification and the
economy’s upscaling. This Fund’s operations can be conducted through equity investments in the
capital of private companies with high growth potential. The Mohammed VI Strategic Investment
Fund was established to complement the government of Morocco’s COVID-19 recovery package. It
aims to provide equity and quasi-equity instruments to strengthen the solvency of companies and
contribute to the rebounding of investments in priority areas for economic growth (infrastructure,
innovation, domestic firms and Startups companies). It is interesting to note that the annual target size
for The Mohammed VI Strategic Investment Fund has been set at DH45 billion, of which DH15
billion is provided by the state ; DH30 billion is to be mobilized from domestic and foreign public and
private investors.

4. Conclusion

The purpose of this paper was to discuss the effect of trade openness on economic growth, in light of
the literature review the impact was found to be positive in some studies and non-significant or even
negative in others. As an illustrative case, we opted for Morocco during the period 1990-2020 by using
the SVAR approach inspired from the methodology originally proposed by (Blanchard and Perotti,
2002).

It seems that the impact of trade openness has no significant effect on economic growth in Morocco in
the long term. This result contrasts with authors like (Sachs & Warner, 1995 ; Edwards, 1998 ;
Grossman & Helpman, 1990, 1991a, 1991b ; Iyoha & Okim, 2017 ; Wiredu et al., 2020 ; Oppong et
al., 2022 ; Agyei & Idan, 2022) which shed light on the positive role of the fight against trade barriers
in favor of economic growth. Similarly, financial development has a negative and non-significant
effect on economic growth. This result is not consistent with the results of the study by ( Mc Kinnon
and Shaw, 1973) which have highlighted the crucial role of the financial system as a factor capable of
stimulating economic growth through a channel of transmission of positive real interest rates.

http://journal-efm.fr 479
 Journal of Economics, Finance and Management (JEFM) - ISSN: 2958-7360

Moreover, Morocco has introduced of a trade liberalization policy in the face of an often unstable
macroeconomic framework due to the lack of diversification of the country’s exports and the
concentration only on very limited sectors. Furthermore, the existence of certain barriers and obstacles
have cooperated to disrupt the freedom of trade between Morocco and the outside world including the
financial crisis of 2008 and recently the COVID-19 pandemic. Decision-makers need to integrate
multiple institutional, macroeconomic, human, and financial factors to achieve a model that can drive
post-COVID-19 economic activity, to achieve this goal, Morocco must begin a transformation of its
diverse productive fabric.

In conclusion, the COVID-19 pandemic has further exposed the weaknesses in the structure of the
international social and economic order, with direct implications for the role of the State and
international cooperation. it is important to look back at the COVID-19 crisis and learn from it to
remake society for a better future and provide answers to questions on trade, finance, digitalization,
global value chains, institutional quality. The vision is there : the New Model of Development, 2021
report, new investment charter, the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development and the Paris Agreement. These are available tools can be activated to achieve the
Macroeconomic resilience and promoting inclusive growth.

REFERENCES

1. Abor, J.Y., Amidu, M., & Issahaku, H. (2018). Mobile telephony, financial inclusion and inclusive
growth. Journal of African Business, 19(3), 430–453
2. Acemoglu, Daron, and Fabrizio Zilibotti. (2001). Productivity Differences. The Quarterly Journal
of Economics, vol. 116, no. 2, 2001, pp. 563–606.
3. Acemoglu, Daron, Suresh Naidu, Pascual Restrepo, and James A. Robinson. (2019). Democracy
Does Cause Growth. Journal of Political Economy 127 (1).
4. Agbahoungba, Lesfran.S.W, and Thiam. (2018). Economic Growth effects of External Trade in
ECOWAS”. MPRA paper No.89035, pp. 1-22.
5. Anser, Muhammad Khalid et al. (2021). Financial development during COVID-19 pandemic: The
role of coronavirus testing and functional labs, Financial Innovation, ISSN 2199-4730, Springer,
Heidelberg, Vol. 7, Iss. 1, pp. 1-13
6. Balassa, B. (1985). Exports, Policy Choices, and Economic Growth in Developing Countries after
the 1973 Oil Shock. Journal of Development Economics, 18, 23-35.
7. Banerjee- A.V, and Newman-A.F. (2003). Inequality, Growth, and Trade Policy, Cambridge, MA,
University College London.
8. Banque Mondiale (2020). Rapport de suivi sur la situation économique au Maroc, Juillet 2020.
9. Barro, R. and Sala-i-M. X. (1995). Economic Growth. Mc Graw Hill, New-York.
10. Beck, T., Levine, R., & Loayza, N. (2000). Finance and the sources of growth. Journal of
Financial Economics, 58(1-2), 261-300.

http://journal-efm.fr 480
 Journal of Economics, Finance and Management (JEFM) - ISSN: 2958-7360

11. Blanchard, O and Perotti. R (2002). An Empirical Characterization of Dynamic Effects of

Changes in Government Spending and Taxes on Output. Quarterly Journal of Economics,
Vol.117, pp. 1329-1368.
12. Bouis, Romain, and Romain Duval.(2011). Raising Potential Growth After the Crisis: A
Quantitative Assessment of the Potential Gains from Various Structural Reforms in the OECD
Area and Beyond.” OECD Economics Department Working Paper 835, Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris.
13. Brown R, Rocha A (2020). Entrepreneurial uncertainty during the Covid-19 crisis: mapping the
temporal dynamics of entrepreneurial finance. J Bus Vent Insights 14:e00174
14. Brueckner, M., and Lederman, D. (2015). Trade openness and economic growth: Panel data
evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa. Economica, 82, pp. 1302–1323
15. Cardarelli, Roberto, and Taline Koranchelian, eds. (2023). Morocco’s Quest for Stronger and
Inclusive Growth. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.
16. Cerra, V., B. Eichengreen, A. El- Ganainy, and M. Schindler. (2022) . How to Achieve Inclusive
Growth. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
17. Coe, D. T. et Helpman, E. (1993). International R&D Spillovers. National Bureau of Economic
Research.
18. Corrado, G., & Corrado, L. (2017). Inclusive finance for inclusive growth and development.
Current opinion in environmental sustainability, 24, 19–23
19. Das, A., & Paul, B. P. (2011). Openness and Growth in Emerging Asian Economies: Evidence
from GMM Estimations of a Dynamic Panel. Economics Bulletin, 3, 2219-2228.
20. Demirguc-Kunt, A., Klapper, L., & Singer, D. (2017). Financial inclusion and inclusive growth: A
review of recent empirical evidence. The World Bank.
21. Dollar, D., & Kraay, A. (2004). Trade Growth and Poverty. Economic Journal, 114, 22-49.
22. Duval, Romain, and Davide Furceri. 2018. The Effects of Labor and Product Market Reforms:
The Role of Macroeconomic Conditions and Policies. IMF Economic Review 66 (1): 31–69.
23. Edwards, S. (1998). Openness, productivity and growth : what do we really know ?. The economic
journal, 108(447), pp. 383-398.
24. Fallahgoul H (2020). Inside the Mind of Investors During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Evidence
from the Stock Twits Data.
25. Feder, G. (1983). On Exports and Economic Growth. Journal of Development Economics, 12, 59-
73.
26. Frankel, J. and Romer, D.(1999). Does Trade Cause Growth? . American Economic
Review, vol. 89 (3), pp. 379-399.
27. Grossman, G. M. and Helpman, E. (1990). Trade, innovation, and growth. The American
economic review, 80(2), pp.86-91.
28. Grossman, G. M. and Helpman, E. (1991a). Innovation and growth in the global economy.
Cambridge, Mass. et London : MIT Press.
29. Grossman, G. M. and Helpman, E. (1991b). Quality ladders in the theory of growth. The Review
of economic studies, 58(1), pp.43-61.
30. Harrison, A. (1996). Openness and Growth: A Time-Series, Cross-Country Analysis for
Developing Countries. Journal of development Economics, 48, 419-447.
31. HCP (2021). Point de conjecture : Quatrième trimestre 2020 et perspectives pour le premier
trimestre 2021.
32. International Monetary Fund (2007). World Economic Outlook, October 2007: Globalization and
Inequality. IMF Occasional Paper 07/10, International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC
33. International Monetary Fund (2023). Middle East and Central Asia : building resilience and
fostering sustainable growth, International Monetary Fund, October 2023, Washington, DC

http://journal-efm.fr 481
 Journal of Economics, Finance and Management (JEFM) - ISSN: 2958-7360

34. Iyoha, M. and Okim, A. ( 2017). “The impact of trade on economic growth in ECOWAS
countries: Evidence from panel data”. CBN Journal of Applied Statistics 8(1),23–49.
35. Keho, Y. (2017). The Impact of Trade Openness on Economic Growth: The Case of Cote d’Ivoire.
Cogent Economics & Finance, 5, 1-14
36. King, R.G. and Levine, R. (1993). Finance and Growth: Schumpeter Might Be Right. The
Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108, 717-737.
37. Krugman, R.P. (1987). Is Free Trade Passe . Journal of economic perspectives, vol. 1, no. 2, pp.
131-144.
38. Lawal, A. I., Nwanji, T. I., Asaleye, A., et Ahmed, V. (2016). Economic growth, financial
development and trade openness in Nigeria: An application of the ARDL bound testing approach.
Cogent Economics and Finance, 4, pp.1–15.
39. Lucas, R. E. (1988). On the Mechanics of Economic Development. Journal of Monetary
Economics, Vol. 22, Issue 1, pp. 3-42.
40. Mc Kinnon, R. I. (1973). Money and Capital in Economic Development. Brookings Institution,
Washington, D.C
41. Mountford and Uhlig, (2009). What Are the Effects of Fiscal Policy Shocks. Journal of Applied
Econometrics, 24, pp. 960-992.
42. Nketiah, E., Adjei, M., Boamah, B. B., & Adu-Gyamfi, G. (2019). The Impact of Remittance on
the Real Exchange Rate in Ghana. Open Journal of Business and Management, 7, 1862-1879.
43. Oppong-Baah, T., Bo, Y., Twi-Brempong, C., Amoah, E. O., Prempeh, N. A., & Addai, M.
(2022). The Impact of Trade Openness on Economic Growth: The Case of Ghana and Nigeria.
Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies, 10, 142-160.
44. Procacci P.F, Phelan C.E, Aste., T (2020). Market structure dynamics during COVID-19 outbreak.
45. Ricardo, D. (1817). Des principes de l'économie politique et de l'impôt. GF – Flammarion,
Traduction française sous la direction de François Régis Mahieu, Paris, Flammarion, 1992, 508 p.
46. Rivera-Batiz, L. A. and Romer, P. M.( 1991). International Trade with Endogenous
Technological Change. European Economic Review, Vol. 35, Issue 4, pp. 971-1001.
47. Rodriguez, F. and Rodrik, D.( 2000). Trade Policy and Economic Growth: A Skeptic’s
guide to the Cross-National Evidence . Macroeconomics Annual 2000, MIT Press, Boston.
48. Rodrik, D., Subramanian, A. and Trebbi, F. (2004). Institutions Rule: The Primacy of Institutions
over Geography and Integration in Economic Development . Journal of economic growth, 9 (2) :
131–165
49. Romer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of political Economy, 98, pp. 71-
102.
50. Sachs, JD. and Warner, A.(1995). Economic Reform and the of Global Integration.
Brookings Papers on Economic Activities, vol. 1, pp. 1-118. Series, n°608,
51. Samuel Kwaku Agyei & Godwin Adolf Idan, (2022). Trade Openness, Institutions, and Inclusive
Growth in Sub-Saharan Africa, SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, May
52. Sekali, J., & Bouzahzah, M. (2021). Développement financier et croissance économique : Cas du
Maroc. International Journal of Accounting, Finance, Auditing, Management and Economics,
2(3), 95-108.
53. Shujiro Urata (2022). Trade-Investment Nexus and Economic Growth in East Asia, Chap.11, in
Sustainable Development Disciplines for Society, Springer.
54. Smith, A. (1776). La richesse des nations. GF – Flammarion, Traduction française de Germain
Garnier, 1881.
55. Solow, R. M. (1956). A contribution to the theory of economic growth. The quarterly journal of
economics, 70(1), pp. 65-94.

http://journal-efm.fr 482
 Journal of Economics, Finance and Management (JEFM) - ISSN: 2958-7360

56. Stiglitz, J.E (2013). The Price of Inequality: How Today’s Divided Society Endangers Our Future.
Norton and Company. New York
57. Topuz, S.G. (2022). The Relationship Between Income Inequality and Economic Growth: Are
Transmission Channels Effective?. Soc Indic Res 162, 1177–1231.
58. UNCTAD (2021a). Key statistics and trends in international trade.
59. UNCTAD (2022). Trade and Development Report 2022 : Trade and investment trends during the
pandemic : lessons Learned
60. Wang, C., Liu, X., & Wei, Y. (2004). Impact of Openness on Growth in Different Country
Groups. The World Economy, 27, 567-585
61. Wiredu, J., Nketiah, E., & Adjei, M. (2020). The Relationship between Trade Openness, Foreign
Direct Investment and Economic Growth in West Africa: Static Panel Data Model. Journal of
Human Resource and Sustainability Studies, 8, 18-34.
62. Young, A. (1991). Learning by doing and the dynamic effects of international trade. The
Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(2), pp. 369-405.
63. Yu, J.-S., Hassan, M. K., Mamun, A., & Hassan, A. (2014). Financial Sectors Reform and
Economic Growth in Morocco: An Empirical Analysis. Journal of Emerging Market Finance,
13(1), 69-102.
64. Zarra-Nezhad, M., Hosseinpour, F., & Arman, S. A. (2014). Trade-Growth Nexus in Developing
and Developed Countries: An Application of Extreme Bounds Analysis. Asian Economic and
Financial Review, 4, 915-929.

http://journal-efm.fr 483