IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jecsur/v17y2003i3p309-362.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What have We Learnt from the Convergence Debate?

Author

Listed:
  • Nazrul Islam

    (Emory University)

Abstract

This paper surveys the convergence literature. It begins by laying out different definitions of convergence and by showing the link between the convergence issue and the growth theory debate. The paper then follows the convergence research conducted along four different approaches, namely the cross-section, panel, time-series, and distribution approaches. The paper shows the association of these methodological approaches with various definitions of convergence and highlights the connections among the convergence results. It shows that, despite some impressions to the contrary, there is considerable agreement among the results. Although the convergence research might not have solved the growth debate entirely, it has helped both the neoclassical and the new growth theories to adapt and evolve. The research on convergence has established new stylized facts regarding cross-country growth regularities. It has brought to fore the existence of large technological and institutional differences across countries and has given rise to new methodologies for quantifying and analyzing these differences. This is providing a new information base for analysis of technological and institutional diffusion and for further development of growth theory in general. Copyright Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 2003.

Suggested Citation

  • Nazrul Islam, 2003. "What have We Learnt from the Convergence Debate?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(3), pages 309-362, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jecsur:v:17:y:2003:i:3:p:309-362
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/servlet/useragent?func=synergy&synergyAction=showTOC&journalCode=joes&volume=17&issue=3&year=2003&part=null
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    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:bla:jecsur:v:17:y:2003:i:3:p:309-362. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley Content Delivery) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0950-0804 .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.