IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/lev/wrkpap/wp_120.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Productivity Convergence Debate: A Theoretical and Methodological Reconsideration

Author

Listed:
  • Bruce Elmslie
  • William Milberg

Abstract

Two fundamental issues have been ignored in the convergence debate which are addressed in this paper. First, there has been little attention paid to the development of a general model able to explain convergence a divergence. Second, in the rush to put data to a convergence hypothesis, researchers have failed to consider certain methodological procedures with respect to the treatment of capital. To remedy this problem we use an input-output approach to measure catch-up. To address the theoretical lacunae we present case studies of Portugal and Japan, two countries which by 1959 had attained the threshold level of development required to join the “convergence- club”, but which, for various historical (path-dependent) reasons, have diverged rapidly from each other in the period since the late 1950’s.

Suggested Citation

  • Bruce Elmslie & William Milberg, 1994. "The Productivity Convergence Debate: A Theoretical and Methodological Reconsideration," Economics Working Paper Archive wp_120, Levy Economics Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:lev:wrkpap:wp_120
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp120.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Krugman, Paul, 1987. "The narrow moving band, the Dutch disease, and the competitive consequences of Mrs. Thatcher : Notes on trade in the presence of dynamic scale economies," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1-2), pages 41-55, October.
    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. Halvor Mehlum & Karl Moene & Ragnar Torvik, 2006. "Institutions and the Resource Curse," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 116(508), pages 1-20, January.
    2. Peretto, Pietro F. & Valente, Simone, 2011. "Resources, innovation and growth in the global economy," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(4), pages 387-399.
    3. Tybout, James R. & Westbrook, M. Daniel, 1995. "Trade liberalization and the dimensions of efficiency change in Mexican manufacturing industries," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1-2), pages 53-78, August.
    4. Mary Amiti & Jozef Konings, 2007. "Trade Liberalization, Intermediate Inputs, and Productivity: Evidence from Indonesia," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(5), pages 1611-1638, December.
    5. Till F. Hollstein & Kristian Estévez, 2017. "Industrial Policy and the Timing of Trade Liberalization," UB School of Economics Working Papers 2017/361, University of Barcelona School of Economics.
    6. Beňo, Michal, 2021. "E-working: Country Versus Culture Dimension," AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, vol. 13(2), June.
    7. Riascos, Luis Hernando Portillo, 2014. "Extractivismo clásico y neoextractivismo, ¿Dos tipos de extractivismos diferentes?," Revista Tendencias, Universidad de Narino, vol. 15(2), pages 11-29, July.
    8. Dennis Nchor & Pavel Kolman & Luboš Střelec & Samuel Antwi Darkwah, 2015. "The New Oil Sector and the Dutch Disease: the Case of Ghana," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 63(6), pages 2035-2041.
    9. Keld Laursen, 1998. "How Structural Change Differs, and Why it Matters (for Economic Growth)," DRUID Working Papers 98-25, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    10. Paula Bustos & Juan Manuel Castro Vincenzi & Joan Monras & Jacopo Ponticelli, 2019. "Structural Transformation, Industrial Specialization, and Endogenous Growth," Working Papers wp2019_1906, CEMFI.
    11. Andrew Sharpe & Bert Waslander, 2014. "The Impact of the Oil Boom on Canada's Labour Productivity Performance," CSLS Research Reports 2014-05, Centre for the Study of Living Standards.
    12. Daron Acemoglu & Fabrizio Zilibotti, 2001. "Productivity Differences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(2), pages 563-606.
    13. Michele Boldrin & Jose A. Scheinkman, 1988. "Learning-By-Doing, International Trade and Growth: A Note," UCLA Economics Working Papers 462, UCLA Department of Economics.
    14. 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.
    15. Pietro F. Peretto & Simone Valente, 2010. "Resource Wealth, Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy," CER-ETH Economics working paper series 10/124, CER-ETH - Center of Economic Research (CER-ETH) at ETH Zurich.
    16. van der Ploeg, Frederick & Venables, Anthony J., 2013. "Absorbing a windfall of foreign exchange: Dutch disease dynamics," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 229-243.
    17. Måns Söderbom & Francis Teal, 2003. "Openness and human capital as sources of productivity growth: An empirical investigation," CSAE Working Paper Series 2003-06, Centre for the Study of African Economies, University of Oxford.
    18. Robin Boadway & Motohiro Sato & Jean-François Tremblay, 2018. "Natural Resource Extraction in a Federation," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 74(1), pages 34-51, March.
    19. Boris Petkov, 2018. "Natural Resource Abundance: Is it a Blessing or is it a Curse," Journal of Economic Development, Chung-Ang Unviersity, Department of Economics, vol. 43(3), pages 25-56, September.
    20. Frederick Ploeg, 2011. "Fiscal policy and Dutch disease," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 121-138, June.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O4 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity
    • F02 - International Economics - - General - - - International Economic Order and Integration

    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:lev:wrkpap:wp_120. 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: Elizabeth Dunn (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.levyinstitute.org .

    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.