The Investing–Saving Relationship Debate Between Opposing Views: A Panel Analysis Across Main Economic Regions

This paper focuses on an empirical analysis of the relationship between investing and saving, taking into account various economic regions. The economic aggregates are selected following the International Monetary Fund (IMF) standard classification. The investigation is developed within the theoretical frameworks proposed by the debate between the mainstream neoclassical school of thought and the post-Keynesian school. Our approach differs from other empirical works on the subject in that we apply innovative Granger non-causality panel tests to four datasets covering a wide range of countries over the period 1980 to 2024. This is the very first time these advanced panel tests have been applied to such data. The information is valuable for defining macroeconomic policy and supporting potential credibility of one theory over another in the debate. Our empirical results are coherent with the post-Keynesian interpretation of the relationship between the variables when applied to an international context in which trade and capital movements are liberalized.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Economies
Published
2026-01-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/economies14010022
Primary Topic
Economic Theory and Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Investing–Saving Relationship Debate Between Opposing Views: A Panel Analysis Across Main Economic Regions

Antonio Focacci
Economies
Economic Theory and Policy
article

The Investing–Saving Relationship Debate Between Opposing Views: A Panel Analysis Across Main Economic Regions

Antonio Focacci
article en

Abstract

This paper focuses on an empirical analysis of the relationship between investing and saving, taking into account various economic regions. The economic aggregates are selected following the International Monetary Fund (IMF) standard classification. The investigation is developed within the theoretical frameworks proposed by the debate between the mainstream neoclassical school of thought and the post-Keynesian school. Our approach differs from other empirical works on the subject in that we apply innovative Granger non-causality panel tests to four datasets covering a wide range of countries over the period 1980 to 2024. This is the very first time these advanced panel tests have been applied to such data. The information is valuable for defining macroeconomic policy and supporting potential credibility of one theory over another in the debate. Our empirical results are coherent with the post-Keynesian interpretation of the relationship between the variables when applied to an international context in which trade and capital movements are liberalized.

EconomiesVol. 14(1)
University of Bologna (IT)
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 92%
Economic Theory and Policy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.