IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/msn/rfjrnl/v5y2020i9p1-11.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Efecto de la Innovación sobre el Crecimiento Económico de México: Análisis Empírico con el Modelo de Crecimiento Endógeno de Romer

Author

Listed:
  • Maria Francisca Peñaloza Talavera

    (Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo)

  • Jaime Apolinar Martínez Arroyo

    (Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo)

Abstract

Este trabajo tiene como objetivo principal analizar el papel que juega la innovación en la dinámica del crecimiento económico en México durante el periodo 1994 – 2017. Para tal propósito, se utiliza el modelo de crecimiento endógeno de Romer (1990), el cual plantea que la innovación (A), resultado del cambio técnico, es una variable que incide en el crecimiento del Producto Interno Bruto (Y) de un país. Además de la innovación (stock de conocimiento), medida a través de las patentes (pat) y las exportaciones de productos tecnológicos (XBAT), el modelo considera a la inversión fija, medida por la Formación Bruta de Capital Fijo (K) y al Capital Humano (H) otras dos variables importantes para el crecimiento del producto. El análisis de las variables se realiza empleando series de tiempo a través de la técnica Mínimos Cuadrados Ordinarios (OLS). El resultado de las estimaciones indica que la innovación, medida por patentes y XBAT, el capital humano y el capital fijo inciden positivamente en el crecimiento económico de México, el grado de incidencia de cada una de estas variables es 0.07%, 0.2%, 0.15% y 0.35% respectivamente. El valor de K resulta ser alto dado que las inversiones físicas que se realizan en el país son significativas y muestran tasas positivas de crecimiento durante el periodo estudiado. En el caso de las variables H, XBAT y patentes, las estimaciones muestran valores relativamente bajos, resultado atribuido a la baja inversión que se realiza en el sector de la Ciencia y Tecnología (CyT) a nivel nacional, inversión que no supera el 0. 5% del PIB cada año. De modo que, este resultado positivo, pero no altamente significativo no es otra cosa más que el reflejo de la rezagada situación en que se encuentra el sector CyT en México.

Suggested Citation

  • Maria Francisca Peñaloza Talavera & Jaime Apolinar Martínez Arroyo, 2020. "Efecto de la Innovación sobre el Crecimiento Económico de México: Análisis Empírico con el Modelo de Crecimiento Endógeno de Romer," Revista de la Facultad de Contaduría y Ciencias Administrativas, Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo, Facultad de Contaduría y Ciencias Administrativas, vol. 5(9), pages 1-11, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:msn:rfjrnl:v:5:y:2020:i:9:p:1-11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://rfcca.umich.mx/index.php/rfcca/article/view/135
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert M. Solow, 1956. "A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 70(1), pages 65-94.
    2. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Barro, Robert J, 1990. "Government Spending in a Simple Model of Endogenous Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 103-126, October.
    4. Rebelo, Sergio, 1991. "Long-Run Policy Analysis and Long-Run Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(3), pages 500-521, June.
    5. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    7. Michael E. Porter & Scott Stern, 2000. "Measuring the "Ideas" Production Function: Evidence from International Patent Output," NBER Working Papers 7891, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Gianni Guastella & Francesco Timpano, 2016. "Knowledge, innovation, agglomeration and regional convergence in the EU: motivating place-based regional intervention," Review of Regional Research: Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft, Springer;Gesellschaft für Regionalforschung (GfR), vol. 36(2), pages 121-143, October.
    9. Moses Abramovitz, 1956. "Resource and Output Trends in the United States since 1870," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number abra56-1.
    10. Moses Abramovitz, 1956. "Resource and Output Trends in the United States since 1870," NBER Chapters, in: Resource and Output Trends in the United States since 1870, pages 1-23, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Dirk Frantzen, 2000. "R&D, Human Capital and International Technology Spillovers: A Cross‐country Analysis," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 102(1), pages 57-75, March.
    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. Matthias Firgo & Peter Mayerhofer, 2015. "Wissens-Spillovers und regionale Entwicklung - welche strukturpolitische Ausrichtung optimiert des Wachstum?," Working Paper Reihe der AK Wien - Materialien zu Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft 144, Kammer für Arbeiter und Angestellte für Wien, Abteilung Wirtschaftswissenschaft und Statistik.
    2. Young Eun Kim & Norman V. Loayza, 2019. "Productivity Growth: Patterns and Determinants across the World," Revista Economía, Fondo Editorial - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, vol. 42(84), pages 36-93.
    3. Hugo Erken & Piet Donselaar & Roy Thurik, 2018. "Total factor productivity and the role of entrepreneurship," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(6), pages 1493-1521, December.
    4. Alan M. Taylor, 1995. "Growth and Convergence in the Asia-Pacific Region: On the Role of Openness, Trade and Migration," NBER Working Papers 5276, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Furman, Jeffrey L. & Hayes, Richard, 2004. "Catching up or standing still?: National innovative productivity among 'follower' countries, 1978-1999," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1329-1354, November.
    6. Kumar, Sanjesh & Singh, Baljeet, 2019. "Barriers to the international diffusion of technological innovations," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 74-86.
    7. M.Rosaria Alfano & A. Laura Baraldi, 2008. "The design of electoral rules and their impact on economic growth: the Italian case," Working Papers 3_2008, D.E.S. (Department of Economic Studies), University of Naples "Parthenope", Italy.
    8. Ayres, Robert U, 2001. "The minimum complexity of endogenous growth models:," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 26(9), pages 817-838.
    9. Matthias Firgo & Peter Mayerhofer, 2015. "Wissensintensive Unternehmensdienste, Wissens-Spillovers und regionales Wachstum. Teilprojekt 1: Wissens-Spillovers und regionale Entwicklung – Welche strukturpolitische Ausrichtung optimiert das Wach," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 58342, March.
    10. Harabi, Najib, 1994. "Technischer Fortschritt in der Schweiz: Empirische Ergebnisse aus industrieökonomischer Sicht [Technischer Fortschritt in der Schweiz:Empirische Ergebnisse aus industrieökonomischer Sicht]," MPRA Paper 6725, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Krüger Jens J. & Cantner Uwe & Hanusch Horst, 2003. "Explaining International Productivity Differences / Erklärung internationaler Produktivitätsunterschiede," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 223(6), pages 659-679, December.
    12. Jens Krueger & Uwe Cantner & Horst Hanusch, 1998. "Explaining International Productivity Differences," Discussion Paper Series 179, Universitaet Augsburg, Institute for Economics.
    13. van de Klundert, T.C.M.J. & Smulders, J.A., 1991. "Reconstructing growth theory : A survey," Other publications TiSEM 19355c51-17eb-4d5d-aa66-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    14. Carine Nourry, 2012. "Dasgupta, D.: Modern growth theory," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 105(1), pages 97-100, January.
    15. Michalis Nikiforos, 2020. "Demand, Distribution, Productivity, Structural Change, and (Secular?) Stagnation," Economics Working Paper Archive wp_945, Levy Economics Institute.
    16. Ghate Chetan, 2003. "The Politics of Endogenous Growth," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-18, August.
    17. William Easterly & Ross Levine, 2002. "It´s Not Factor Accumulation: Stylized Facts and Growth Models," Central Banking, Analysis, and Economic Policies Book Series, in: Norman Loayza & Raimundo Soto & Norman Loayza (Series Editor) & Klaus Schmidt-Hebbel (Series Editor) (ed.),Economic Growth: Sources, Trends, and Cycles, edition 1, volume 6, chapter 3, pages 061-114, Central Bank of Chile.
    18. Scott L. Baier & Gerald P. Dwyer & Robert Tamura, 2006. "How Important are Capital and Total Factor Productivity for Economic Growth?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 44(1), pages 23-49, January.
    19. Mohammad Imdadul Haque, 2019. "Growth Accounting for Saudi Arabia," Asian Economic and Financial Review, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 9(6), pages 691-701, June.
    20. Claude Diebolt & Tapas Mishra & Bazoumana Ouattara & Mamata Parhi, 2010. "Does democratic distance matter for cross-country growth interdependence?," Working Papers 10-12, Association Française de Cliométrie (AFC).

    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:msn:rfjrnl:v:5:y:2020:i:9:p:1-11. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/famicmx.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.