{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.014146772767462422, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007073386383731211, 'mean_word_length': 5.185792349726776, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Growth in European Crisis Countries: Cyclical Normality or the Result of Structural Reforms?

Abstract In mid-2013 the macroeconomic situation in European crisis economies started to show signs of recovery. In the political debate, improving economic conditions were often attributed to recently enacted structural reforms. In this paper, we use empirical business cycle models to indirectly assess the short term impact of recent structural reforms on growth. Given the past deep recession, a typical cyclical movement would imply far higher growth rates than have been observed in such countries in the recent recovery. Short-term economic performance is rather a sign of a long-lasting and severe weakness in demand which can almost exclusively be explained by characteristics of business cycles following financial crises as well as the initial situation in European crisis economies prior to 2009. With different approaches we are not able to deliver evidence that structural reforms have yet had a significant impact on growth, neither a positive nor a negative one. It will still take time for growth effects to materialize.