IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/hohpro/362012.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Wachstums- und Investitionsdynamik in Deutschland

Author

Listed:
  • Erber, Georg
  • Hagemann, Harald

Abstract

Sowohl auf theoretischer als auch auf empirischer Ebene wurde die wichtige Rolle privater und staatlicher Investitionstätigkeit für das Wirtschaftswachstum deutlich. Zu betonen ist hierbei, dass beide Investitionsarten in einer komplementären Beziehung zueinander stehen, so dass ein entsprechend ausbalancierter Mix an privaten und staatlichen Investitionen wesentlich für das Erreichen eines dynamischen Wachstumspfades ist. Die Bedeutung der privaten Investitionstätigkeit für den Konjunktur- und Wachstumsverlauf einer Volkswirtschaft wurde anhand verschiedener Modelle wie z.B. dem Multiplikator-Akzelerator-Modell diskutiert und hervorgehoben. Die besondere Rolle der staatlichen Investitionstätigkeit und deren Auswirkungen auf das Wirtschaftswachstum wurden im Rahmen der Aschauer-Hypothese vertieft dargestellt. Insgesamt ist aber auf theoretischer Ebene dennoch kritisch zu hinterfragen, auf welcher Grundlage ein bestimmter Investitionsmangel identifiziert wird und wie ein optimales Investitionsniveau bestimmt werden kann. Auf Grund dieser geradezu fundamentalen Bedeutung der Investitionen für das Wirtschaftswachstum erscheint es um so erschreckender, dass gerade in Deutschland als eine der weltweit führenden Industrienationen die Investitionstätigkeit seit Jahren auf internationaler Ebene nicht ebenso im Spitzenfeld zu finden ist. Dies ist insofern von besonderer Brisanz, da die Deutsche Wirtschaft und deren Schlüsselbranchen, wie die Automobilindustrie, in einem harten internationalen Wettbewerb stehen und somit eine verhaltene Investitionstätigkeit auf privater und staatlicher Ebene langfristig entsprechend negative Konsequenzen für die Produktion und den Arbeitsmarkt erwarten lassen. Ganz allgemein lassen sich negative Beschäftigungseffekte in einer dynamischen Weltwirtschaft und angesichts eines immer voranschreitenden technologischen Wandels nie ganz vermeiden. Wie aber in dieser Studie herausgearbeitet wurde, sind gerade daher Investitionen auch in Bezug auf den
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Erber, Georg & Hagemann, Harald, 2012. "Wachstums- und Investitionsdynamik in Deutschland," Violette Reihe: Schriftenreihe des Promotionsschwerpunkts "Globalisierung und Beschäftigung" 36/2012, University of Hohenheim, Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg, Evangelisches Studienwerk.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:hohpro:362012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/60467/1/720446694.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aschauer, David Alan, 2000. "Public Capital and Economic Growth: Issues of Quantity, Finance, and Efficiency," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 48(2), pages 391-406, January.
    2. Georg Erber, 2011. "Deutsch-chinesische Wirtschaftsbeziehungen: Chancen und Risiken," DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 78(50), pages 3-7.
    3. Georg Erber, 1995. "Public Infrastructure, Productivity and Competitiveness: Analysis of Relative Differences and Impacts with Regard to U.S. and German Industries," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 115, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    4. David Alan Aschauer, 1988. "Government spending and the "falling rate of profit."," Economic Perspectives, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, vol. 12(May), pages 11-17.
    5. Alan S. Blinder & Louis J. Maccini, 1991. "Taking Stock: A Critical Assessment of Recent Research on Inventories," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 73-96, Winter.
    6. Abramovitz, Moses, 1986. "Catching Up, Forging Ahead, and Falling Behind," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(2), pages 385-406, June.
    7. David Alan Aschauer, 1989. "Back of the G-7 pack: public investment and productivity growth in the Group of Seven," Working Paper Series, Macroeconomic Issues 89-13, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
    8. David Alan Aschauer, 2000. "Do states optimize? Public capital and economic growth," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 34(3), pages 343-363.
    9. Aschauer, David Alan, 1989. "Does public capital crowd out private capital?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 171-188, September.
    10. Georg Erber, 2008. "Verbriefungen: eine Finanzinnovation und ihre fatalen Folgen," DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 75(43), pages 668-677.
    11. K. J. Arrow, 1971. "The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: F. H. Hahn (ed.), Readings in the Theory of Growth, chapter 11, pages 131-149, Palgrave Macmillan.
    12. Aschauer, David Alan, 1989. "Is public expenditure productive?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 177-200, March.
    13. Tsang, Eric W. K., 2014. "Old and New," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(03), pages 390-390, November.
    14. David Alan Aschauer, 1987. "Is the public capital stock too low?," Chicago Fed Letter, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, issue Oct.
    15. David Alan Aschauer, 1990. "Why is infrastructure important?," Conference Series ; [Proceedings], Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, vol. 34, pages 21-68.
    16. Martin Gornig & Alexander Schiersch, 2012. "Deutsche Industrie trotzt dem Aufstieg der Schwellenländer," DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 79(10), pages 11-15.
    17. Georg Erber, 2011. "Verbriefungen sind tot - lang leben Verbriefungen?," DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 78(35), pages 2-11.
    18. Georg Erber, 2012. "Poetry and Truth: Germany’s Position on Unit Labour Costs, External Trade and Real Exchange Rates in the Eurozone – What do the Statistics Say?," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 65(05), pages 20-34, March.
    19. Paul R. Krugman, 1988. "Deindustrialization, Reindustrialization, and the Real Exchange Rate," NBER Working Papers 2586, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Ferdinand Fichtner & Simon Junker & Kerstin Bernoth & Christian Dreger & Christoph Große Steffen & Martin Gornig & Hendrik Hagedorn & Beate R. Jochimsen & Katharina Pijnenburg, 2012. "Verunsicherung und hohe Schulden bremsen Wachstum," DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 79(1/2), pages 2-30.
    21. Tregenna, Fiona, 2011. "Manufacturing Productivity, Deindustrialization, and Reindustrialization," WIDER Working Paper Series 057, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    22. Fiona Tregenna, 2011. "Manufacturing Productivity, Deindustrialization, and Reindustrialization," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2011-057, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    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. Stephanie Aubert & Andreas Stephan, 2000. "Regional Infrastructure Policy and its Impact on Productivity: A Comparison of Germany and France," CIG Working Papers FS IV 00-02, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
    2. Achim Kemmerling & Andreas Stephan, 2000. "Political Economy of Infrastructure Investment Allocation: Evidence from a Panel of Large German Cities," CIG Working Papers FS IV 00-03, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
    3. Kemmerling, Achim & Stephan, Andreas, 2002. "The Contribution of Local Public Infrastructure to Private Productivity and Its Political Economy: Evidence from a Panel of Large German Cities," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 113(3-4), pages 403-424, December.
    4. Shulgin, A. & Shulgin, S., 2021. "Investments in the infrastructure of Siberia and the Far East. Macroeconomic analysis based on general equilibrium model," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 49(1), pages 81-114.
    5. Marie-Ange VEGANZONES-VAROUDAKIS, 2000. "Infrastructures, investissement et croissance : un bilan de dix années de recherches," Working Papers 200007, CERDI.
    6. Andreas Stephan, 2003. "Assessing the contribution of public capital to private production: Evidence from the German manufacturing sector," International Review of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(4), pages 399-417.
    7. Minea, Alexandru, 2008. "The Role of Public Spending in the Growth Theory Evolution," Journal for Economic Forecasting, Institute for Economic Forecasting, vol. 5(2), pages 99-120, June.
    8. Schreiner, Lena & Madlener, Reinhard, 2022. "Investing in power grid infrastructure as a flexibility option: A DSGE assessment for Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    9. Szirmai, Adam & Verspagen, Bart, 2015. "Manufacturing and economic growth in developing countries, 1950–2005," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 46-59.
    10. Fedderke, J.W. & Bogetic, Z., 2009. "Infrastructure and Growth in South Africa: Direct and Indirect Productivity Impacts of 19 Infrastructure Measures," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1522-1539, September.
    11. Andreea Ocolișanu & Gabriela Dobrotă & Dan Dobrotă, 2022. "The Effects of Public Investment on Sustainable Economic Growth: Empirical Evidence from Emerging Countries in Central and Eastern Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-25, July.
    12. Atif Ansar & Bent Flyvbjerg & Alexander Budzier & Daniel Lunn, 2016. "Does infrastructure investment lead to economic growth or economic fragility? Evidence from China," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 32(3), pages 360-390.
    13. Cadot, Olivier & Roller, Lars-Hendrik & Stephan, Andreas, 2006. "Contribution to productivity or pork barrel? The two faces of infrastructure investment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(6-7), pages 1133-1153, August.
    14. Nigel Spence & Antonis Rovolis, 2002. "Duality theory and cost function analysis in a regional context: the impact of public infrastructure capital in the Greek regions," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 36(1), pages 55-78.
    15. Ahmed, Riaz, 2016. "Social infrastructure and productivity of manufacturing firms: Evidence from Pakistan," ZEW Discussion Papers 16-038, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    16. Yin Germaschewski, 2016. "Getting help from abroad: The macroeconomics of foreign direct investment in infrastructure in low‐income countries," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(4), pages 1502-1535, November.
    17. Conroy, Tessa & Deller, Steven & Tsvetkova, Alexandra, 2016. "Regional business climate and interstate manufacturing relocation decisions," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 155-168.
    18. James Brox & Christina Fader, 2005. "Infrastructure investment and Canadian manufacturing productivity," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(11), pages 1247-1256.
    19. Pina, Alvaro Manuel & St. Aubyn, Miguel, 2005. "Comparing macroeconomic returns on human and public capital: An empirical analysis of the Portuguese case (1960-2001)," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 585-598, July.
    20. Carmen Díaz Roldán & Diego Martínez-López, 2005. "Inversión pública y crecimiento económico. Una revisión crítica con propuesta de futuro," Economic Working Papers at Centro de Estudios Andaluces E2005/10, Centro de Estudios Andaluces.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:zbw:hohpro:362012. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ivhohde.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.