IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ris/ecoint/0604.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Robustness of Equations of the Process of Economic Growth - Robustezza delle equazioni del processo di crescita economica

Author

Listed:
  • Qayum, Abdul

    (Portland State University Economics - Liberal Arts & Sciences)

Abstract

Economic growth is driven by the process of accumulation of the dominant resource expressed by an ordinary differential equation. This equation is studied in the models of Harrod (1939), Solow (1956), Lucas (1988), Romer (1990), and Grossman and Helpman (1991). The equations of the first three are robust, but not of the last two. The paper suggests an essential correction and a uniform procedure for formulating the equations. The paper also considers endogeneity in the first two models, with capital as the dominant resource, and empirical robustness of the last three with human capital and knowledge as the dominant resources. An economic growth model with the long run growth rate given from outside is considered as exogenous. It is defined as endogenous when the longrun rate of growth is determined from within by the solution of the system of equations of the model which describe the sources and causes of growth. Among these, there is usually one dominant source which is the main driving force in the process of growth. This may be physical capital, physical capital per effective worker, human capital, knowledge, or number of innovations. The equation of the process of economic growth expresses the process of accumulation of the variable representing the dominant source of growth by an ordinary linear differential equation. This paper studies the equations of the process of economic growth in the five outstanding contributions by Harrod (1939), Solow (1956), Lucas (1988), Romer (1990) and Grossman and Helpman (1991). Of these the first two contributions are not known as presenting endogenous models. It is argued here that the model in the first contribution is as endogenous as any other model and in the second, the model is not as exogenous as it has been made out to be. The models in the first two contributions do not express specifically the equations of the process of growth, but they can be tracked easily. The third contribution by Lucas presents a plausible equation of the process of growth with the possibility of being empirically verified. The equations in the last two contributions by Romer and Grossman and Helpman are not theoretically plausible or empirically verifiable. The aim of this paper is to point out the flaw in the formulation of the equation of the process of growth in the models of these two contributions and to suggest much needed correction to make them theoretically plausible and to set them free from the possibility of their being highly explosive and unstable. - La crescita economica è guidata dal processo di accumulazione della “risorsa dominante” espresso da un’equazione differenziale lineare ordinaria. Tale equazione è stata studiata nei modelli di Harrod (1939), Solow (1956), Lucas (1988), Romer (1990) e Grossman e Helpman (1991). Nei primi tre casi le equazioni risultano essere robuste, non così per Romer e per Grossman e Helpman. In questo studio si suggerisce una modifica essenziale e una procedura uniforme per la formulazione di queste equazioni. Nei primi due modelli, inoltre, viene considerata l’endogenicità e il capitale è assunto come “risorsa dominante”, mentre per gli altri tre viene considerata la robustezza empirica, con capitale umano e conoscenza come “risorse dominanti”. Un modello di crescita economica con tasso di lungo periodo dato dall’esterno è considerato esogeno. Si parla invece di modello endogeno quando tale tasso è determinato tramite la soluzione di un sistema di equazioni che descrivono le fonti e le cause che originano la crescita. Tra queste generalmente una è dominante e traina il processo di crescita. Tale fonte può essere il capitale, il capitale fisico per lavoratore, il capitale umano, la conoscenza o l’innovazione. L’equazione della crescita esprime il processo di accumulazione della variabile che rappresenta la fonte dominante della crescita stessa, tramite un’equazione differenziale lineare ordinaria. Questo studio esamina le equazioni dei processi di crescita descritte nei cinque importanti lavori di Harrod (1939), Solow (1956), Lucas (1988), Romer (1990) e Grossman e Helpman (1991). Tra questi, è noto che i primi due non presentano modelli di tipo endogeno. Nel nostro studio sosteniamo che in Harrod il modello è endogeno come qualunque altro modello, mentre il modello di Solow non è in realtà esogeno come generalmente ritenuto. Questi due modelli non esprimono specificamente le equazioni della crescita, sebbene esse si possano facilmente intuire. Il contributo di Lucas presenta un’equazione plausibile che, inoltre, può essere empiricamente verificata. Le equazioni di Romer e di Grossman e Helpman non sono teoricamente plausibili né empiricamente verificabili. Lo scopo di questo studio è evidenziare le criticità presenti nelle equazioni della crescita formulate da Romer e da Grossman e Helpman e suggerire le modifiche necessarie per renderle teoricamente plausibili e prive dei problemi di esplosività e di instabilità.

Suggested Citation

  • Qayum, Abdul, 2010. "Robustness of Equations of the Process of Economic Growth - Robustezza delle equazioni del processo di crescita economica," Economia Internazionale / International Economics, Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato Agricoltura di Genova, vol. 63(4), pages 407-421.
  • Handle: RePEc:ris:ecoint:0604
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.iei1946.it/RePEc/ccg/QAYUM%20407_421.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Romer, Paul M, 1986. "Increasing Returns and Long-run Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(5), pages 1002-1037, October.
    2. Solow, Robert M., 2000. "Growth Theory: An Exposition," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 2, number 9780195109030.
    3. N. Gregory Mankiw & David Romer & David N. Weil, 1992. "A Contribution to the Empirics of Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 107(2), pages 407-437.
    4. Charles I. Jones, 1995. "Time Series Tests of Endogenous Growth Models," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(2), pages 495-525.
    5. Romer, Paul M, 1987. "Growth Based on Increasing Returns Due to Specialization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(2), pages 56-62, May.
    6. Edward F. Denison, 1961. "United States Economic Growth," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 35, pages 109-109.
    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. Volker Grossmann & Thomas Steger, 2007. "Growth, Development, and Technological Change," CESifo Working Paper Series 1913, CESifo.
    2. Juergen Antony, 2005. "Scale Externalities of the G7 Countries," Discussion Paper Series 280, Universitaet Augsburg, Institute for Economics.
    3. Juergen Antony, 2005. "Weak Scale Effects in Growth Models," Discussion Paper Series 276, Universitaet Augsburg, Institute for Economics.
    4. Norman Gemmell, 2001. "Fiscal Policy in a Growth Framework," WIDER Working Paper Series DP2001-84, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    5. Ejike Udeogu & Shampa Roy-Mukherjee & Uzochukwu Amakom, 2021. "Does Increasing Product Complexity and Diversity Cause Economic Growth in the Long-Run? A GMM Panel VAR Evidence," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(3), pages 21582440211, August.
    6. Gnidchenko, Andrey, 2011. "Моделирование Технологических И Институциональных Эффектов В Макроэкономическом Прогнозировании [Technological and Institutional Effects Modeling in Macroeconomic Forecasting]," MPRA Paper 35484, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised May 2011.
    7. ?gel de la Fuente, "undated". "Convergence Across Countries And Regions: Theory And Empirics," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 447.00, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
    8. Sushil Kumar Haldar, 2009. "Economic Growth in India Revisited," South Asia Economic Journal, Institute of Policy Studies of Sri Lanka, vol. 10(1), pages 105-126, January.
    9. Pozzolo, Alberto Franco, 2004. "Endogenous Growth in Open Economies - A Survey of Major Results," Economics & Statistics Discussion Papers esdp04020, University of Molise, Department of Economics.
    10. 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.
    11. Guido Ascari & Valeria di Cosmo, 2005. "Determinants of total factor productivity in the italian Regions," SCIENZE REGIONALI, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2005(2).
    12. Durlauf, Steven N. & Quah, Danny T., 1999. "The new empirics of economic growth," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & M. Woodford (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 4, pages 235-308, Elsevier.
    13. Tran, Nguyen Van & Alauddin, Mohammad & Tran, Quyet Van, 2019. "Labour quality and benefits reaped from global economic integration: An application of dynamic panel SGMM estimators," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 92-106.
    14. Michael Peneder & Karl Aiginger & Gernot Hutschenreiter & Markus Marterbauer, 2001. "Structural Change and Economic Growth," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 20668.
    15. 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.
    16. Voxi Heinrich S Amavilah & Richard T. Newcomb, 2004. "Economic Growth and the Financial Economics of Capital Accumulation under Shifting Technological Change," GE, Growth, Math methods 0404001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Suri, Tavneet & Boozer, Michael A. & Ranis, Gustav & Stewart, Frances, 2011. "Paths to Success: The Relationship Between Human Development and Economic Growth," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 506-522, April.
    18. Rosa Capolupo, 2005. "THE NEW GROWTH THEORIES AND THEIR EMPIRICS, Discussion Paper in Economics, University of Glasgow, N. 2005-04 (http://www.gla.ac.uk/Acad/Economics," GE, Growth, Math methods 0506003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Aurora Teixeira & Natércia Fortuna, 2003. "Human Capital, Innovation Capability and Economic Growth," FEP Working Papers 131, Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Economia do Porto.
    20. Weale, Martin, 1992. "Education, externalities, fertility, and economic growth," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1039, The World Bank.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Dynamic Equations; Equilibrium Growth; Steady State; Human Capital; Knowledge Capital; Innovations;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General

    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:ris:ecoint:0604. 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: Angela Procopio (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cacogit.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.