IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/beo/journl/v63y2018i217p7-38.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Schumpeterian Growth Theory: Empirical Testing Of Barriers To Competition-Proximity To Frontier Algorithm

Author

Listed:
  • Predrag Petrović
  • Goran Nikolić

Abstract

This study is dedicated to empirical testing of barriers to competition effect on productivity growth, taking into account the hypothesis that different policies improve economic growth in countries at different levels of technological development. The results of econometric analysis of two panel data sets comprising 144 countries (not controlled for education) and 128 countries (controlled for education) have demonstrated that when approaching the technology frontier, countries with high barriers to competition lose their productivity growth much faster than countries with a low barrier, which is the direct result of the decreasing but positive influence of barriers to competition on productivity growth, regardless of whether the economy is underdeveloped or advanced. This positive effect of barriers can be rationalized by Romer’s (1990) product variety model; or possibly by the inverted-U pattern between competition and innovation proved by Aghion et al. (2005), under the assumption that these sample countries are on the downward slope. Finally, the positive effect of barriers, irrespective of the degree of the countries’ technological development, implies that the theory is not completely consistent with empirical data.

Suggested Citation

  • Predrag Petrović & Goran Nikolić, 2018. "Schumpeterian Growth Theory: Empirical Testing Of Barriers To Competition-Proximity To Frontier Algorithm," Economic Annals, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Belgrade, vol. 63(217), pages 7-38, April – J.
  • Handle: RePEc:beo:journl:v:63:y:2018:i:217:p:7-38
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ekof.bg.ac.rs/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/529.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joseph Zeira, 1998. "Workers, Machines, and Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 113(4), pages 1091-1117.
    2. Hansen, Lars Peter, 1982. "Large Sample Properties of Generalized Method of Moments Estimators," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(4), pages 1029-1054, July.
    3. Kleibergen, Frank & Paap, Richard, 2006. "Generalized reduced rank tests using the singular value decomposition," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 133(1), pages 97-126, July.
    4. M. Hashem Pesaran, 2021. "General diagnostic tests for cross-sectional dependence in panels," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 60(1), pages 13-50, January.
    5. Daron Acemoglu & Philippe Aghion & Fabrizio Zilibotti, 2006. "Distance to Frontier, Selection, and Economic Growth," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 4(1), pages 37-74, March.
    6. John C. Driscoll & Aart C. Kraay, 1998. "Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimation With Spatially Dependent Panel Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(4), pages 549-560, November.
    7. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    8. Barro, Robert J & Sala-i-Martin, Xavier, 1997. "Technological Diffusion, Convergence, and Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 1-26, March.
    9. Roy E. Welsch & Edwin Kuh, 1977. "Linear Regression Diagnostics," NBER Working Papers 0173, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Philippe Aghion & Nick Bloom & Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & Peter Howitt, 2005. "Competition and Innovation: an Inverted-U Relationship," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 120(2), pages 701-728.
    11. Newey, Whitney & West, Kenneth, 2014. "A simple, positive semi-definite, heteroscedasticity and autocorrelation consistent covariance matrix," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 33(1), pages 125-132.
    12. Aghion, Philippe & Akcigit, Ufuk & Howitt, Peter, 2014. "What Do We Learn From Schumpeterian Growth Theory?," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 515-563, Elsevier.
    13. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    14. J. P. Royston, 1982. "The W Test for Normality," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 31(2), pages 176-180, June.
    15. James H. Stock & Jonathan Wright, 2000. "GMM with Weak Identification," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1055-1096, September.
    16. Szroeter, Jerzy, 1978. "A Class of Parametric Tests for Heteroscedasticity in Linear Econometric Models X1-ab," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(6), pages 1311-1327, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Amable, Bruno & Ledezma, Ivan & Robin, Stéphane, 2016. "Product market regulation, innovation, and productivity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 2087-2104.
    2. Çağatay Bircan & Ralph De Haas, 2020. "The Limits of Lending? Banks and Technology Adoption across Russia," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 33(2), pages 536-609.
    3. Gros, Daniel & Alcidi, Cinzia, 2014. "The Global Economy in 2030: Trends and Strategies for Europe," CEPS Papers 9142, Centre for European Policy Studies.
    4. Philippe Aghion & Peter Howitt & Susanne Prantl, 2015. "Patent rights, product market reforms, and innovation," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 223-262, September.
    5. Mason, Geoff & O'Leary, Brigid & Vecchi, Michela, 2012. "Certified and uncertified skills and productivity growth performance: Cross-country evidence at industry level," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 351-360.
    6. Leonardo Andrade Rocha & Ahmad Saeed Khan & Patrícia Verônica Pinheiro Sales Lima & Maria Ester Dal Poz & Fernando Porfirio Soares De Oliveira, 2016. "Corrupção, Burocracia E Outras Falhas Institucionais: O “Câncer” Da Inovação E Do Desenvolvimento," Anais do XLIII Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 43rd Brazilian Economics Meeting] 090, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    7. Peppel-Srebrny, Jemima, 2021. "Not all government budget deficits are created equal: Evidence from advanced economies' sovereign bond markets," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    8. Steven Bond‐Smith, 2022. "Discretely innovating: The effect of limited market contestability on innovation and growth," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 69(3), pages 301-327, July.
    9. Kong, Dongmin & Zhang, Bohui & Zhang, Jian, 2022. "Higher education and corporate innovation," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    10. Alessandro D. SCOPELLITI, 2010. "Competition And Economic Growth: A Critical Survey Of The Theoretical Literature," Journal of Applied Economic Sciences, Spiru Haret University, Faculty of Financial Management and Accounting Craiova, vol. 5(1(11)_Spr), pages 70-93.
    11. Chen, Jie & Leung, Woon Sau & Evans, Kevin P., 2016. "Are employee-friendly workplaces conducive to innovation?," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 61-79.
    12. Bessonova, Evguenia & Gonchar, Ksenia, 2019. "How the innovation-competition link is shaped by technology distance in a high-barrier catch-up economy," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 86, pages 15-32.
    13. Shuai Wang & Fayyaz Ahmad & Yanlong Li & Nabila Abid & Abbas Ali Chandio & Abdul Rehman, 2022. "The Impact of Industrial Subsidies and Enterprise Innovation on Enterprise Performance: Evidence from Listed Chinese Manufacturing Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-17, April.
    14. Jérôme Vandenbussche & Philippe Aghion & Costas Meghir, 2006. "Growth, distance to frontier and composition of human capital," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 97-127, June.
    15. Philippe Aghion & Ufuk Akcigit & Antonin Bergeaud & Richard Blundell & David Hemous, 2019. "Innovation and Top Income Inequality," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(1), pages 1-45.
    16. Capolupo, Rosa, 2009. "The New Growth Theories and Their Empirics after Twenty Years," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 3, pages 1-72.
    17. Vasilis Sarafidis & Tom Wansbeek, 2012. "Cross-Sectional Dependence in Panel Data Analysis," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(5), pages 483-531, September.
    18. Gang Gong & Alfred Greiner & Willi Semmler, 2004. "Endogenous Growth: Estimating the Romer Model for the US and Germany," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 66(2), pages 147-164, May.
    19. Acemoglu, Daron & Gancia, Gino & Zilibotti, Fabrizio, 2012. "Competing engines of growth: Innovation and standardization," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(2), pages 570-601.3.
    20. Papaioannou, Sotiris K., 2017. "Regulations and productivity: Long run effects and nonlinear influences," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 244-252.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Schumpeterian growth theory; productivity growth; barriers to competition; proximity to frontier; technology frontier; education;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O47 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - Empirical Studies of Economic Growth; Aggregate Productivity; Cross-Country Output Convergence
    • C23 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Models with Panel Data; Spatio-temporal Models
    • C26 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Instrumental Variables (IV) Estimation

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:beo:journl:v:63:y:2018:i:217:p:7-38. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Goran Petrić (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/efbeoyu.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.