Kelly (1992) has recently shown that evidence on convergence cannot be taken as evidence against endogenous growth in general. This study uses a well-known class of stochastic growth models to show other difficulties with traditional empirical studies of convergence. Key parameters typically cannot be estimated consistently in cross-section regressions. When the parameters are assumed known, implications for convergence are unavailable except under restrictive and economically unmotivated assumptions. Those same assumptions that relate key parameters to cross-country convergence render cross-section regressions impossible to estimate consistently.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers in its series CEPR Discussion Papers with number
1383.
Find related papers by JEL classification: E32 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Prices, Business Fluctuations, and Cycles - - - Business Fluctuations; Cycles O41 - Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - One, Two, and Multisector Growth Models
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)