“RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DETERMINANTS OF
HOUSEHOLD SAVINGS:
EVIDENCE FROM INDIA”
Dr Tarika Singh*
Associate Professor, Prestige Institute of Management, Gwalior; Address: B25 Colour Valley
Coatings India Ltd., Maharajpura Industrial Area, Pinto Park, Gwalior (M.P.) India. Contact
no.9425342333.Email id: singh.tarika@gmail.com
Farid Khan and Sumit Srivastava
Alumni, PIMG
Till time, various researches have been done on the determinants of household savings in
developed countries, developing countries and in under developed countries. But similar work is
lacking in Indian context as social security system is yet to get implement in Indian Context. So
to understand the cause and effect between variables and determinants of household savings in
Indian context this study is being done. This study is intended to be a useful contribution to the
students and researchers in investment management and economic development by providing a
link between theory and practice and an opportunity to test the theoretical ideas regarding the
relationship of variables and household savings in India.
Key Words: Household savings, pension funds
INTRODUCTION
Gosh and Pain (2005) described savings as the difference between Income and Expenditure. A
high level of savings helps the economy to progress on a continuous growth path since
Investment is mainly financed out of savings. Given the importance of savings there have been
extensive studies on the behavioral and other factors, which influence savings.
The Former Patterns Of Indian Household Savings
Athukorala and Sen (2001) said that Gross Domestic Savings in India has shown a steady and
substantial rise from the 1950s along with the rise in income. As per Indian National Accounts,
Gross Domestic Savings includes current transfers from Indian emigrants and net factor income
from abroad. The overall savings period in India is roughly divided into five phases based on the
careful identification of the distinctive phases starting from the year 1950.The household sector
which is comprised of the pure households, non corporate enterprises in agriculture, trade and
industry and private non profit making trusts, has retained a high savings rate in comparison to
public sector savings and private corporate sector savings in all the phases. Floro and Seguino
(1999) indicated that as some measures of women’s discretionary income and bargaining power
increase, aggregate saving rates rise, implying a significant effect of gender on aggregate
savings. These findings demonstrate the importance of understanding gender relations at the
household level in planning for savings mobilization and in the formulation of financial and
investment policies. Kelley and Williamson (2009), did a study regarding the relationship of
household savings, source of income, and age are several. Results suggested that a precise
identification of both the causation and its magnitude can be important in appraising the social
rate of return in human capital formation. Also, the possibilities for building up aggregate
personal savings relationships from micro data seem promising. Kanti Das (2011) identified the
preferred investment avenues among the individual investors using self assessment test. It was
observed that the level of income also influences the investment decisions. Higher income group
shows relatively high preference towards investment in share market, conversely lower and
average income group shows keen preference towards insurance and banks as the most preferred
investment avenues.
Loayza et al (2000) reviewed the current state of knowledge on the determinants of saving rates,
presenting the main findings and contributions of the recently completed World Bank research
project, “Saving Across the World.” The article discusses the basic design of the research project
and its core database, the World Saving Database. Special attention is paid to the relationship
between growth and saving and the impact of specific policies on saving rates.
Recent Trends in Indian Household Savings
According to a study published in newspaper, the Hindu, an economic climate that favours the
concept “spending beyond means”, creating an environment that pampers the consumer, should
have resulted in a drastic reduction in household savings. But the last decade’s savings figures
show that Indian households have proved otherwise. Indian household seems to secure its
interest through adequate and prudent savings in a most conservative manner, notwithstanding
the systematic discouraging policy initiatives, aping the West, to compel the household to blow
the money. In the last decade, the interest rates on savings have been drastically cut, the tax
incentives for savings have suffered from serious instability, and both the capital market and the
non-banking finance companies administered rude shocks to investors. Consumerism is being
consciously promoted by making available loans/credit cards with increased options to
prospective buyers
Similarly, in an article published in economic times.com, India's household savings, which have
fuelled growth over the last few years, have dropped to below 10% of gross domestic product, or
national income, for the first time in 13 years, as soaring inflation ate into disposable incomes.
Buragohain (2009), according to these results both APs, MPs and income elasticity of savings
provide a sufficient encouraging picture and these values have been increasing mostly on
economic resurgence period (1990-2007). This implies household disposable income is the better
determinants for household savings and it increased with increase in income, satisfied the
Keynesian hypothesis with recent data.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Important issues to consider in the measurement of household saving over time and across
countries are the demarcation between household and corporate saving in the national accounts
and the impact of inflation on measured saving. Regarding the first, under the System of
National Accounts (1993,), the first household sector is defined to include unincorporated
enterprises. However, the distinction between households and corporate is not always clear-cut.
Whereas incorporated family business are included in the corporate sector. Such definitional
issues may cause problems in allocating income and saving across the different sectors in the
economy and these problems may vary between countries. Further, any changes in the incentives
to incorporate over time (for examples for taxes purpose) or between different countries may also
affect the split between household and corporate savings. While it is not possible to make
adjustments to the data to accounts for these affects they are likely to get picked up in the
regression presented.
According to Aghevli and others (1990) , Masson and others (1995), Growth, demographics,
household, wealth, unemployment, real interest rate, inflation, terms of trade, and proxies for
financial deregulation for a more extensive discussion of the impact of these variables on saving.
According to Schmidt-Hebbel and others (1996), the impact of growth on saving is also unclear
theoretically but empirically saving and growth are highly correlated over long time horizons as
well as for many regions and stages of development, with higher rates of growth being associated
with higher saving. A number of studies have found a significant proportion of household saving
to be a precautionary nature (Skinner,1988) said that changes in these benefits could have a
significant impact on the level of household saving. Further, governments provide substantial
assistance to households through the free or subsidized provision of goods and services in the
kind benefits such as education, healthcare and public housing. Such benefits lower the need for
personal saving to cover expenditures in these areas. Later on Stiglitz, (1996) the analysis added
to two main areas in the economic literature. First, the empirical insights from our analysis will
inform the current debate on the sources and policy implications of the East Asian miracle. High
saving is often identified as one of the key factors contributing to the rapid growth of Taiwan and
the other newly industrialized economies (NIEs) in East Asia in the past quarter century.
Bayoumi (1993) said that financial deregulation is also an important influence on household
saving with an ambiguous direction of impact of priori: development of the financial system may
increase the opportunities for, and returns to, financial saving, but it may also enhance access to
credit and ease liquidity constraints faced by households and could, therefore, at least initially,
lead to lower household saving. If capital income is taxed, as common in most countries, the
price of future relative to present consumption increases and this distorts the intertemporal
resource allocation decision by effectively taxing savings. Even if the supply of savings is little
affected by the rate of return, the intertemporal inefficiency resulting from the distortion of
relative prices due to ”double taxation” of saving remains (Boadway and wildasin, 1994). This
problem is aggravated in the presence of inflation when the tax system is not indexed and taxes
nominal returns (Feldstein, 1978).
A number of studies have found a significant proportion of household saving to be a
precautionary nature (Skinner, 1988) said that changes in these benefits could have a significant
impact on the level of household saving. Further, governments provide substantial assistance to
households through the free or subsidized provision of goods and services in the kind benefits
such as education, healthcare and public housing. Such benefits lower the need for personal
saving to cover expenditures in these areas. Masson and others (1995) who suggest it may be due
to the increased integration of domestic and international financial markets which has reduced
the linkages between saving, investment, and growth, and between private and government
saving. According to Patrick (1994) most recently, the saving behavior of these countries has
attracted added attention as potential source of growing external surpluses of these countries.
Deaton, (1989) gave vast differences among various countries with respect to the nature and
quality of data, cross-country comparision is fraught with danger. Not only the statistical
procedures for measuring saving and investment, but also the magnitude of errors in data in the
implementation of these procedures, vary significantly among countries. Feldstein (1980) argued
that public pension schemes have a negative impact on private saving, but his findings have been
disputed on empirical and theoretical grounds.
Jangili (2010) examined the direction of the relationship between saving, investment and
economic growth in India at both aggregate level and sectoral level for the period 1950-51 to
2007-08 by using Granger causality test. The empirical results suggest that there exists reciprocal
causality from saving and investment of the private sector to economic growth. This reciprocal
causality emanates from the household sector, where saving and investment led growth and
growth driven saving and investment was observed. It is empirically evident that private
corporate sector saving does not lead to economic growth, however, saving and investment of the
sector collectively lead to economic growth and vice-versa. Saving led growth in emerging
market economies implies that the economy is not catching up with the technology frontier and
hence growth is not driven by the innovations that are taking place worldwide. The results
indicate that though the Indian economy is opened to foreign investments, growth is still driven
by the domestic saving. Furthermore, local firms may not be absorbing the technology which
comes through the foreign investment in order to undertake more profitable innovation projects.
McGregor (1998) in their report in 1998 found underlying macroeconomic issue in the saving.
Debate is not whether it is possible for investment to proceed in the face of a relatively low rate
of national saving, but whether it is desirable (or even feasible), on a long term basis, to cover a
shortfall between national saving and national investment by drawing on the saving of
foreigners. Bernheim and Scholz (1993), presented the evidence that supports the view that
many Americans, particularly those without a college education, save too little. The analysis also
indicates that it should be possible to increase total personal saving among lower income
households by encouraging the formation and expansion of private pension plans.
Okun's law in macroeconomics states that in an economy the GDP growth should depend
linearly on the changes in the unemployment rate. In statistics, ordinary least squares (OLS) or
linear least squares is a method for estimating the unknown parameters in a linear regression
model. Meng (2003), The permanent income hypothesis and life-cycle models allowing for
precautionary saving suggest that households may be able to smooth their consumption by
saving during normal periods or when facing high income uncertainties and dissaving when
adverse economic shocks occur. Economic shocks occur frequently, especially in the developing
world, due to normal business cycles, financial shocks, and economic restructuring. Facing such
shocks, many individuals and households experience difficult periods of unexpected reduction in
income, and perhaps even poverty. One mechanism used by governments in the developed world
to offset the effect of adverse shocks is an income support scheme. The theoretical background
for government-financed direct income support schemes assumes that individual households are
limited in their ability to help themselves and that individuals are unable to save for their own
uncertain future (Bauer and Paish, 1952).
However, according to the permanent income hypothesis, individual households should be able
to smooth their consumption by saving in normal times and dis-saving during periods of adverse
economic shocks. Many empirical studies find evidence to support the permanent income
hypothesis in several developing economies. (Bhalla,1979, 1980; Wolpin, 1982; Paxson, 1992).
Furthermore, life cycle models allowing for precautionary saving indicate that, if uncertainty
over future income increases, current consumption falls and saving increases, especially in the
developing world where liquidity constraints are significant (Caroll and Sanwick, 1994; Deaton,
1997).
In an study done in euro nation, on sustainable development in the areas of socioeconomic
development, it was found that, Many of the long-term trends in the socioeconomic development
theme have been influenced, either positively or negatively, by the recent global economic and
financial crisis. In this respect trends have deteriorated in the short term in particular in
investment, employment and unemployment, as well as in real GDP per capita and labour
productivity, even if these last two have started to pick up again. On the other hand,
improvements have been seen in R&D expenditure and energy intensity, and briefly
in household saving.
Athukorala in 1998 did a study in Indian context and examined the role of interest rates in the
process of economic development through an empirical inquiry into the interest
rate‐saving‐investment nexus in the Indian economy during the period 1955–95. The results were
generally in support of the financial liberalization school of thought. Higher real interest rates
seem to promote both financial and total savings, and stimulate private investment. On the
investment side, the combined salutary effect of interest rate increases operating through
increased debt intermediation and self‐financed capital accumulation outweighs the direct cost
effect on investment.
OZCAN et al (2003) investigated the effects on private saving rates of a number of policy and
non-policy variables for the period 1968–1994 for Turkey is estimated. The findings support the
hypothesis that private saving rates have strong inertia. The evidence indicates that government
saving does not tend to crowd out private savings. Income level has a positive impact on private
saving rate, and growth rate of income is not statistically significant. The precautionary motive
for saving is supported by the findings that inflation captures the degree of macroeconomic
volatility r, Bernhard (1986). Abeysinghe (2005), attempted to shed some light on the
relationship issue based on the experience of Sri Lanka, a low middle income country and found
a significant negative effect of mandatory EPF savings on non-EPF private savings but suggest
that this can be offset, to some degree, through the efficient management of mandatory savings
to minimize waste and maximize returns to savings.
Loayza, Hebbel and Servén (2006), investigated empirically the policy and non policy factors
behind these saving disparities using a large, cross-country, time-series data set and following an
encompassing approach including a number of relevant private saving determinants. Samwick
(1999), studied the effect of social security on saving using a panel of countries over twenty-five
years. There was little evidence that countries that implement defined contribution reforms have
higher trends in savings rates after the reform.
The study found that Declining fertility,
mortality, and productivity rates in developed countries and the popularity of the social security
privatization in Chile as a pathway to financial development have sparked a global interest in
social security reform.
Based on the extensive review, following determinants were found: Household Saving, Deposit
Interest Rate, GDP Per Capita Growth, Tax on Household Income, Gross Domestic Saving,
Inflation GDP Deflator, Social Contribution, Unemployment Rate, Household Consumption,
Age Dependency Ratio (Old), Age Dependency Ratio (Young), Real Interest Rate, Household
Saving Rate, Public Saving Rate and Private Saving Rate.
OBJECTIVE
•
To find out the relationship between determinants of household savings in India.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The study was descriptive in nature. In the study the population was all the nations in world. The
study was for the study time period of 10 years (2001-2010). Sample size of study was one
nation. i.e. INDIA. Non probability judgmental sample technique was used in our study.
Secondary source was used to collect the data, its official website of Indian economy.
TOOLS TO USED FOR DATA ANALYSIS
For Unit Root we applied Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF), To check normal distribution we
applied Normality Test, and Regression Analysis {Panel Regression and Ordinary Least Squares
(OLS)}, was applied between dependent variable (Household Saving) and independent variable
(Deposit Interest Rate, GDP Per Capita Growth, Tax on Household Income, Gross Domestic
Saving, Inflation GDP
Deflator, Social Contribution, Unemployment Rate, Household
Consumption, Age Dependency Ratio (Old), Age Dependency Ratio (Young), Real Interest
Rate, Household Saving Rate, Public Saving Rate and Private Saving Rate).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
To fulfill the objective of research and for the purpose of this study, the data of variables was
taken from the Indian Economy. This data was calculated on the basis of previous figures were
driven from performance of Indian Economy. The sources of data collection were World Bank,
International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Budget of
India and other official websites. Our dependent variable was Household Saving and
independent variables were Deposit Interest Rate, GDP Per Capita Growth, Tax on Household
Income, Gross Domestic Saving, Inflation GDP Deflator, Social Contribution, Unemployment
Rate, Household Consumption, Age Dependency Ratio (Old), Age Dependency Ratio (Young),
Real Interest Rate, Household Saving Rate, Public Saving Rate and Private Saving Rate of India.
Normality Test
In statistics, normality tests are used to determine whether a data set is well-modeled by a normal
distribution or not, or to compute how likely an underlying random variable is to be normally
distributed.
Table – 1 Normality Test
Variable
Shapiro-Wilk
Weighted
P - Value
Deposit Interest Rate
0.925009
0.400633
Interpretation
Hypothesis: Test
distribution is Normal
Hypothesis is not rejected
GDP Per Capita Growth
0.811462
0.0199735
Hypothesis is not rejected
Taxes on Household Income
0.953182
0.706207
Hypothesis is not rejected
Gross Domestic Savings
0.873029
0.108416
Hypothesis is not rejected
Inflation, GDP Deflator
0.944932
0.609074
Hypothesis is not rejected
Social Contributions
0.957958
0.762364
Hypothesis is not rejected
Unemployment Rate
0.953226
0.706724
Hypothesis is not rejected
Household Consumption
0.830016
0.0334757
Hypothesis is not rejected
Age Dependency Ratio, Old
0.973679
0.922702
Hypothesis is not rejected
Age Dependency Ratio,
Young
Real Interest Rate
0.967962
0.87133
Hypothesis is not rejected
0.964768
0.838558
Hypothesis is not rejected
Household Saving Rate
0.915834
0.323518
Hypothesis is not rejected
Private Saving Rate
0.903342
0.238314
Hypothesis is not rejected
Public Saving Rate
0.970706
0.89731
Hypothesis is not rejected
From the above table, it can be interpreted that the test data series gave normal distribution of
data. Again the normality of the data was checked through Jarque Bera test too. The results of
the same are discussed below in table 4.
Table – 2: Normality Test, Jarque-Bera
Variable
Jarque-Bera
Weighted
P - Value
Deposit Interest Rate
0.571587
0.751418
Interpretation
Hypothesis: Test
distribution is Normal
Hypothesis is not rejected
GDP Per Capita Growth
1.52625
0.466207
Hypothesis is not rejected
Taxes on Household Income
0.696276
0.706001
Hypothesis is not rejected
Gross Domestic Savings
1.16155
0.559466
Hypothesis is not rejected
Inflation, GDP Deflator
0.634642
0.728097
Hypothesis is not rejected
Social Contributions
0.494659
0.780883
Hypothesis is not rejected
Unemployment Rate
0.344268
0.841867
Hypothesis is not rejected
Household Consumption
1.34617
0.510132
Hypothesis is not rejected
Age Dependency Ratio, Old
0.587859
0.745329
Hypothesis is not rejected
Age Dependency Ratio,
Young
Real Interest Rate
0.641217
0.725707
Hypothesis is not rejected
0.464144
0.792889
Hypothesis is not rejected
Household Saving Rate
0.459509
0.794729
Hypothesis is not rejected
Private Saving Rate
0.944215
0.623686
Hypothesis is not rejected
Public Saving Rate
0.440275
0.802408
Hypothesis is not rejected
The results of the above table too confirm the normal distribution of data. Therefore, from the
above two tables it can be seen that the data is normally distributed. After fulfillment of
Normality criteria for regression, we can move further.
Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) Test
OLS Regression shows the effect of independent variables (gross domestic saving, household
final consumption, private saving and public saving) on dependent variable that is (household
saving). Here in independent variable having special emphasis is social contribution. This
regression indicates positive effect on household saving of gross domestic saving, household
final consumption, private saving and public saving have a highly significant negative effect on
household saving.
Table - 3
Model 1: OLS estimates using the 10 observations 2001-2010
Dependent variable: HouseholdSaving
HAC standard errors, bandwidth 1 (Bartlett kernel)
Constant
Coefficient Std. Error
86.0164 2.95462e-012
t-ratio
29112529460662.3670
p-value
Undefined
GDPpercapitagro
-0.409419
0
-124042453831752.5800
Undefined
Taxesonincomepr
-0.0553031
0
-85319925192661.0310
Undefined
InflationGDPdef
0.278023
0
70463861164650.3120
Undefined
Socialcontribut
-12.1212
1.64209e-013 -73815852189412.8910
Undefined
Unemploymentrat
1.1099
0
202003692663820.1900
Undefined
Realinterestrat
0.226938
0
122783150111746.3900
Undefined
Householdfinalc
-0.954158
0
-28768135836487.0000
Undefined
Depositinterest
0.536819
0
92045905898018.0780
Undefined
Grossdomesticsa
-0.485852
0
-14891622221911.0210
Undefined
Mean of dependent variable = 23.18
Standard deviation of dep. var. = 1.05071
Sum of squared residuals = 0
Standard error of the regression = 0
Unadjusted R2 = 1.00000
F-statistic (9, 0) undefined
In statistics, the Hannan-Quinn information criterion (HQC) is a criterion for model selection. It
is an alternative to Akaike information criterion (AIC) and Bayesian information criterion (BIC).
F-statistic (9, 0) undefined
Here f-statistics is tells whether the model is fit or not, so the F-statistic is (9, 0) undefined, it
mean model is suitably fit.
Here Adjusted R2 = 1.00000 (its percentage 100%) It means there is a strong relationship
between dependent and independent variables.
OLS Regression shows the effect of independent variables (GDP per capita growth, Taxes on
income, Inflation GDP deflator, Social contribution, unemployment rate, Real interest rate,
household final consumption, deposit interest rate, and gross domestic saving) on dependent
variable that is (household saving). This regression indicates positive effect on household saving
of Inflation GDP deflator, unemployment rate, Real interest rate and deposit interest rate.
Taxes on income, GDP per capita growth, Social contribution, household final consumption and
gross domestic saving have a highly significant negative effect on household saving.
OLS Regression: Here in independent variable having special emphasis is population growth
Table - 4
Model 2: OLS estimates using the 10 observations 2001-2010
Dependent variable: HouseholdSaving
HAC standard errors, bandwidth 1 (Bartlett kernel)
Coefficient
Std. Error
t-ratio
p-value
Constant
-238.083
1.91855e-012 -124095283537481.5900
Undefined
Depositinterest
0.428858
0
85003803503926.6410
Undefined
GDPpercapitagro
-0.737604
0
-163039454888911.0900
Undefined
Taxesonincomepr
0.162374
0
75517932876967.1250
Undefined
Grossdomesticsa
2.70395
0
141162272231364.8400
Undefined
InflationGDPdef
-0.0440937
0
-13720783286946.0350
Undefined
Unemploymentrat
1.78091
0
224653723397913.3100
Undefined
Householdfinalc
2.32221
0
117929417168697.1400
Undefined
Populationgrowt
14.3561
1.6344e-013
87837108766849.5000
Undefined
Realinterestrat
0.208278
0
85912644458689.0000
Undefined
Mean of dependent variable = 23.18
Standard deviation of dep. var. = 1.05071
Sum of squared residuals = 0
Standard error of the regression = 0
Unadjusted R2 = 1.00000
F-statistic (9, 0) undefined
In statistics, the Hannan-Quinn information criterion (HQC) is a criterion for model selection. It
is an alternative to Akaike information criterion (AIC) and Bayesian information criterion (BIC).
F-statistic (9, 0) undefined
Here f-statistics is tells whether the model is fit or not, so the F-statistic is (9, 0) undefined, it
mean model is suitably fit.
Here Adjusted R2 = 1.00000 (its percentage 100%) It means there is a strong relationship
between dependent and independent variables.
OLS Regression shows the effect of independent variables (deposit interest rate, GDP per capita
growth, Taxes on income, gross domestic saving, Inflation GDP deflator, unemployment rate,
household final consumption, population growth and real interest rate) on dependent variable
that is (household saving). This regression indicates positive effect on household saving of
Population growth, household final consumption, gross domestic saving Taxes on income,
unemployment rate, Real interest rate and deposit interest rate. GDP per capita growth and
Inflation GDP deflator, have a highly significant negative effect on household saving.
CONCLUSION
The present study was done in Indian context to investigate the ‘Determinants of Household
Saving’. The variable taken for the study were Deposit Interest Rate, GDP Per Capita Growth,
Tax on Household Income, Gross Domestic Saving, Inflation GDP
Deflator, Social
Contribution, Unemployment Rate, Household Consumption, Age Dependency Ratio (Old), Age
Dependency Ratio (Young), Real Interest Rate, Household Saving Rate, Public Saving Rate and
Private Saving Rate). The data on these variables was taken for a period of ten years. The
empirical results indicates that public and corporate saving, GDP growth and demographics
came out to be important factors and all important determinants of household saving, while
some role was also found for inflation, unemployment, the real interest rate and financial
deregulation. A particular focus of the study has been the impact of public policy on household
saving behavior. In the estimation work, variables that capture the structure of the tax system and
the financing the generosity of the social security and welfare systems were found to be
important determinants of household saving. Specifically, a higher reliance on direct income
taxes as opposed to indirect taxes appears to be associated with lower household saving, while
higher government transfers to households are associated with lower saving. These findings
suggest that public policy has an influence of the household saving decision, not only through the
level of public saving itself, but also through the tax and social security systems. The impact on
saving is one factor that needs to be considered in designing or changing tax and social security
systems.
This study provides an explanation of the change in the aggregate household saving rate in India
through the estimation of a saving function formulated in the context of the standard life cycle
framework. The saving function captures the impact of population dynamics, growth of
disposable income, social security contribution, and credit availability and recent financial
reforms. It also accounts for the impact of corporate and government saving on household
saving.
The results confirm the importance of income expansion as a key source of impressive saving
performance; there is clear evidence of a virtuous circle linking growth and saving. Aging of the
population, changes in social security contributions, and the availability of institutional credit for
households are other significant determinants of saving performance.
The similar results found by Prem-Chandra Athukorala & Pang-Long Tsai, in their study on
Determinants of Household Saving in Taiwan: Growth, Demography and Public Policy and by
Lawrence K. Kibet, Benjamin K. Mutai, Desterio E. Ouma, Shem A. Ouma and George Owuor,
in their study on Determinants of household saving: Case study of smallholder farmers,
entrepreneurs and teachers in rural areas of Kenya. Also by Lekshmi R Nair, in their study on
Financial Sector Liberalization and Household Savings in India along with Aart Kraay in their
study on Determinants of Household Saving in China.
REFERENCES


Aasim M.Husain (1995), Long -run determinants of private saving ‘ Behaviour in Pakistan,
The Pakistan Development Review,34.4 part III
Aghevli, B.B.,J.M. Boughton, P.J. Montiel, D. Villanueva, and G. Woglom, 1990, The role of National
Saving in the World Economy: Recent Trends and Prospects, IMF Occasional Paper No. 67 (Washington:
International Monetary Fund)

Allen C. Kelley and Jeffrey G. Williamson (2009), “Household Saving Behavior in the Developing
Economies: The Indonesian Case”, Source: Economic Development and Cultural Change, Vol. 16, No. 3
(Apr., 1968), pp. 385-403;Published by: The University of Chicago Press; Stable URL:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1152489; Accessed: 18/08/2009 14:25

Ashfaque H. Khan (1988), Financial Repression, ‘Financial Development and structure of savings in
Pakistan’ The Pakistan Development Review.vol. XXVII- No.4 part II
Ashfaque H.Khan and Zafar Mueen Nasir (1998), ‘Stylysed facts of household savings’ The
Pakistan Development Review,37:4 part II
B. Douglas Bernheim, John Karl Scholz (1993), “Chapter Title: Private Saving and Public Policy”, Volume
Title: Tax Policy and the Economy, Volume 7,Volume Author/Editor: James Poterba, editor,Volume
Publisher: MIT Press,Volume ISBN: 0-262-16135-4,Volume URL: http://www.nber.org/books/pote93-


1,Conference Date: November 17, 1992,Publication Date: January 1993, Chapter Author: Chapter URL:
http://www.nber.org/chapters/c10878, Chapter pages in book: (p. 73 - 110)

Bayoumi, T., 1993, Financial Deregulation Household Saving,” Economic Journal,

Boadway, R., and D. Wildasin, 1994, “Taxation and Savings: A Survey,” Fiscal Studies, Vol. 15, No. 3,
pp. 19-63.
Deaton, AS., 1989, Saving in Developing Countries’, Proceedings of the World Bank Annuul Conference
on Development Economics 1989, Washington, DC: Weorld Bank, pp.61-108.
Feldstein, M., 1978, “The Welfare Cost of Capital Income Taxation,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol.
86.



Ghosh, Rajarshi and Pain, Asis Kumar, What Determines Household Savings in India? (June 2005).
Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=747046 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.747046




http://databank.worldbank.org/ddp/home.do?Step=3&id=4, retrieved on 12th July 2012.
http://dbie.rbi.org.in/DBIE/dbie.rbi?site=home, retrieved on 14th July 2012.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augmented_Dickey%E2%80%93Fuller_test, retrieved on 19th July 2012.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependency_ratio, retrieved on 5th June 2012.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_domestic_product, retrieved on 5th June 2012.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_final_consumption_expenditure, retrieved on 5th June 2012.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income, retrieved on 5th June 2012.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normality_test, retrieved on 22th July 2012.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordinary_least_squares, retrieved on 22th July 2012.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regression_analysis, retrieved on 19th July 2012.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saving, retrieved on 30th May2012.

http://useconomy.about.com/od/glossary/g/Gdp-Per-Capita.htm, retrieved on 5th June 2012.

http://useconomy.about.com/od/glossary/g/Interest_Rate.htm retrieved, on 30th May2012.

http://www.abc.net.au/money/currency/features/feat4.htm

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/5202.0Main+Features12007?OpenDocument,
retrieved on 30th May2012.

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/savings.html#ixzz21WVnSe84, retrieved on 30th May2012.

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/unemployment-rate.html#ixzz21WppNh4C, retrieved on 5th
June 2012.

http://www.econmodel.com/classic/terms/ur.htm, retrieved on 5th June 2012.




http://www.imf.org/external/country/IND/index.htm, retrieved on 13th July 2012.
http://www.indexmundi.com/india/, retrieved on 15th July 2012.
http://www.indiabudget.nic.in/survey.asp, retrieved on 15th July 2012.
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/deposit-interest-rate.asp, retrieved on 30th May2012.

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/per-capita-gdp.asp#axzz21WUaTbHN, retrieved on 5th June 2012.

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/realinterestrate.asp#ixzz21X0JG8b0, retrieved on 5th June 2012.

http://www.investorwords.com/6530/GDP_deflator.html#ixzz21Wn57GQt, retrieved on 5th June 2012.

http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l48-Household-Savings.html, retrieved on 30th May2012.


http://www.rbi.org.in/scripts/publications.aspx?publication=Annual, retrieved on 14th July 2012.
http://www.state.vt.us/tax/definitionofhouseholdincome.shtml, retrieved on 5th June 2012.

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/todays-paper/tp-opinion/article2188959.ece

http://www.worldbank.org/depweb/english/beyond/global/glossary.html, retrieved on 5th June 2012.

Lachlan McGregor, “Sustaining High Growth: The Role of Domestic SavingsTurkey Country Economic
Memorandum, Synthesis Report”, http://siteresources.worldbank.org/TURKEYEXTN/Resources/3617111331638027014/CEM_DomesticSavings_fulltext.pdf;Report No. 66301-TR,

Masson, P., T. Bayoumi, and H. Samiei, 1995, ”Saving Behavior in Industrial and Developing Countries,”
Staff Studies for World Economic Outlook, pp. 1-27 (Washington International Monetary Fund).

Nadeem A. Burney and Ashfaque H.khan (1992) ‘Socio Economic characterstics and
household savings’ The Pakistan Development Review,31:1
Naheed Z.Khan and Eric Rahim (1993) Foreign Aid, ‘Domestic savings and Economic Growth’ The
Pakistan Development Review32:4 part II
Patrick, H.T., 1994, ‘Comparisons, Contrasts and Irnplecations’, in Hugh T. Patrick and Yung Chul Park
(eds.), Firzanciul Development in Japan, Korea and Taiwan, New York Oxford University Press.
Prema-Chandra A thukorala, Resarch school of pacific and Asian studies, The Australian
National University, Kunal Sen, School of Development studies, University of East Anglia
Ramesh Jangili, “Causal Relationship between Saving, Investment and Economic Growth for India – What
does the Relation Imply?” http://www.rbi.org.in/scripts/bs_viewcontent.aspx?Id=2486
SANJAY KANTI DAS (2000), “N PREFERRED INVESTMENT AVENUES AMONG RURAL AND
SEMI-URBAN HOUSEHOLDS, THE WORLD BANK ECONOMIC REVIEW, VOL. 14, NO. 3: 393–
414,
ISSN:
22499903;http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DEC/Resources/25779_Saving_around_the_world.pdf
Schmidt-Hebbel, K., L. Serven, and A. Solimano, 1996, “Saving and Investment: Paradigms, Puzzles,
Policies,” The World Bank Research Observer, Vol. 11.







Skinner, J., 1988, “Risky Income, Life Cycle Consumption, and Precautionary Savings,” Journal of
Monetary Economics, September , pp.237-55.

Stiglitz, J.E. and M. Uy, 1996, ‘Financial Markets, Public Policy, and the East Asian Miracle’, World Bank
Research Observer, Vol. 1 I , No.2, pp. 249-76.
Tarujyoti Buragohain (2009),” HouseHold savings in india:an econometric assessment”, The Journal of
income and wealth, Vol. 31, No. 1, January-June, 2009;National Council of Applied Economics Research
New Delhiol.103.
www.finance.indiamart.com/taxation/tax_rebates/itrebate.html/, retrieved on 30th May2012.



Zia M. Qureshi (1981), ‘Household saving in Pakistan’ The Pakistan Development Review,
vol XX,No.4