UMBREEN ZAHRA
REG #: 311-FE/MS ECO(2)/F12
TOPIC:EFFECT OF PUBLIC INVESTMENT ON PRIVATE INVESTMENT AT SECTOR LEVEL
SUPERVISOR: DR. ABDUL RASHID
COMMENTS ON SLIDES:
Slide 4: Introduction
First Slide should describe a PROBLEM or a PUZZLE or a CONFLICT or a MYSTERY
your first point is important but presentation needs improvement
Controversy in the literature regarding the impact of public investment on the private investment.
Classical Economist==> Minimum role of govt
==> Public investment crowd out private investment (therefore govt should not invest)
Keynesian EConomist ==> Government investment crowd in private investment through multiplier effect. (role for government)
in second point you move towards impact of public investment at sector level... But relationship of this with previous point, OR with goal of research is not established. It seems like a mysterious point being made at random without connection to anything else.
ALSO, TITLE of slide should be informative. Here it could be: CROWDING OUT VERSUS CROWDING IN.
Slide 5: you tell us what you wanted to do with out establishing its importance.
in previous slide you mention one study from pakistan which has done this analysis at sector level, then how you claim that your study is the first one which examine the impact of public investment on private investment at sector level.
you should see what he has done and discuss it properly and then think what will be your contribution,as far as i know they have divide all industries in to three sectors while you are dividing it in to seven sectors.
without disussing what type of work has been done in pakistan one can not claim that his/her study is the first study.
Slide 6: Significance ==> fine
Slide 7: Objective ==> Fine
Slide 8 & 9: Literature Review
Slide 8: Write in bullets as follows:
TITLE OF SLIDE: THREE TYPES OF STUDIES:
CONTENT:
Studies Supporting Crowding IN
Studies Supporting Crowding OUT
Studies Finding Mixed Effects at Sector Level. Some sectors have crowding in, others have crowding out
Slide 9:
Since you are just naming studies, and not explaining them, you could simply merge this with previous slide, mentiong each type of study alongside the corresponding oint.
Slide 10: Methodology
I will estimate the long run relationship through johansen cointegration test then I will check impulse response function and variance decomposition to evaluate the dynamic interactions among the variables and the relative importance of various shocks.
strange. i find some new issues here; by the way this is estimation techniques not the methodology.
you will check dynamic interactions among the variables and the relative importance of various shocks.
which type of variables you will take in which you will see dynamic interactions
plus now shocks also introduced here, no discussion on the shocks and its impact on the variables which we still dont know what are these.
Slide 11: Variables
so these are the variables among which you will see dynamic interactions.
Slide 11: Equations,
this is the model it should come first..
you did not explain the model, just copying the equation without mentioning the source
Slide 12: Data sources
dont put paragraphs write in bullets.
OVER ALL == you claim this is the first study in Pakistan, but there is one study who has also study at sectoral level. you should clearly state what they have done and how your would be different from them...
your Literature Review is very WEAK, need substantial review for quality work, you just copy the model without any understanding, just mentioning techniques without any link with what you want to do....