IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Solow and the states: New evidence

  • Steven Yamarik

Yamarik S. (2006) Solow and the states: new evidence, Regional Studies 40, 571-582. The aim of this study is to reassess the sources behind US state-level growth during the post-war period. It improves upon the existing literature (1) by using a general method-of-moments (GMM) estimator that eliminates omitted variable and endogeneity bias, (2) by allowing for parameter heterogeneity, and (3) by extending the sample to the pre- and post-productivity slowdown periods. Unlike previous regional growth studies, the paper supports both predictions of neoclassical growth theory. First, strong evidence of convergence in state-level growth rates is found. Second, the rate of convergence and capital share are inversely related. Moreover, numerical computations show that the estimated values for the convergence rate and capital share are consistent with the neoclassical growth model. Yamarik S. (2006) Solow et les Etats: de nouvelles preuves, Regional Studies 40, 571-582. Cette etude cherche a reevaluer les origines de la croissance aux Etats-Unis sur le plan des etats pendant la periode d'apres-guerre. On developpe la documentation existante (1) en utilisant une estimation du type GMM qui elimine la distorsion due aux variables exclues et endogenes, (2) en tenant compte des parametres heterogenes et (3) en etendant l'echantillon aux periodes de ralentissement de la productivite d'avant et d'apres-guerre. A la difference des etudes anterieures sur la croissance regionale, le present article soutient les deux predictions de la theorie de croissance classique. Dans un premier temps, il s'avere de fortes preuves en faveur de la convergence des taux de croissance sur le plan des etats. Dans un deuxieme temps, le taux de convergence et le partage des capitaux se rapportent de facon inversement proportionnelle. Qui plus est, les calculs numeriques montrent que les estimations du taux de convergence et de la part du capital correspondent au modele de croissance neo-classique. Croissance regionale Convergence Enquete permanente GMM Yamarik S. (2006) Solow und die Staaten: neue Beweise, Regional Studies 40, 571-582. Diese Untersuchung beabsichtigt, die Quellen neu zu beurteilen, die in der Nachkriegszeit hinter dem Wachstum der USA auf Staatenebene zu beobachten waren. Verbesserungen der bereits vorhandenen Literatur werden dadurch erreicht, dass: 1. ein GMM Berechner eingesetzt wird, der bisher ausgelassene veranderliche und endogenetische Voreingenommenheit ausschaltet, 2. Rahmenheterogenitat berucksichtigt,und 3. die Stichprobe auf Perioden vor und nach der verlangsamten Leistung ausdehnt. Anders als fruhere Untersuchungen regionalen Wachstums tritt dieser Aufsatz fur beide Vorhersagen der neo-klassischen Wachstumstheorie ein. Erstens gibt es kraftige Beweise der Konvergenz von Wachstumsraten auf uberregionaler Ebene. Zweitens stehen die Raten der Konvergenz und des Kapitalanteils in umgekehrter Beziehung zueinander. Daruberhinaus zeigen zahlenmassige Berechnumgen, dass die berechneten Werte fur die Konvergenzrate und den Kapitalanteil mit dem neo-klassischen Wachstumsmodell ubereinstimmen. Regionales Wachstum Konvergenz Datenliste GMM Yamarik S. (2006) Solow y los Estados: nueva evidencia, Regional Studies 40, 571-582. La finalidad de este estudio es reexaminar las fuentes del crecimiento a nivel estatal en los Estados Unidos durante la era de la posguerra. Basandonos en la literatura presente obtenemos mejores resultados porque (1) usamos un estimador GMM que elimina el sesgo debido a variables omitidas y endogeneidad, (2) tenemos en cuenta el caracter heterogeneo de los parametros y (3) ampliamos la muestra a los periodos anterior y posterior a la disminucion de la productividad. A diferencia de estudios anteriores sobre el crecimiento regional, aqui apoyamos las dos predicciones de la teoria neoclasica del crecimiento. En primer lugar, hallamos solidas pruebas de convergencia en las tasas de crecimiento en un ambito estatal. En segundo lugar, la tasa de convergencia y el porcentaje de capital estan inversamente relacionados. Ademas, las computaciones numericas muestran que los valores estimados para la tasa de convergencia y el porcentaje de capital son coherentes con el modelo de crecimiento neoclasico. Crecimiento regional Convergencia Datos del panel GMM

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00343400600868663
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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.

Article provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Regional Studies.

Volume (Year): 40 (2006)
Issue (Month): 6 ()
Pages: 571-582

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:taf:regstd:v:40:y:2006:i:6:p:571-582
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/CRES20

Order Information: Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CRES20

References listed on IDEAS
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.:

as in new window
  1. Durlauf, S.M. & Johnson, P.A., 1995. "Multiple Regimes and Cross-Country Growth Behavior," Working papers 9419r, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
  2. Barro, R. & Mankiw, G., 1992. "Capital Mobility in Neoclassical Models of Growth," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1615, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
  3. Danny Quah, 1992. "Empirical cross-section dynamics in economic growth," Discussion Paper / Institute for Empirical Macroeconomics 75, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
  4. Caselli, Francesco & Esquivel, Gerardo & Lefort, Fernando, 1996. " Reopening the Convergence Debate: A New Look at Cross-Country Growth Empirics," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 363-89, September.
  5. Douglas Holtz-Eakin & Amy Schwartz, 1995. "Spatial productivity spillovers from public infrastructure: Evidence from state highways," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 459-468, October.
  6. Ortigueira, Salvador & Santos, Manuel S, 1997. "On the Speed of Convergence in Endogenous Growth Models," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(3), pages 383-99, June.
  7. Bernard, Andrew B & Jones, Charles I, 1996. "Productivity and Convergence across U.S. States and Industries," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 113-35.
  8. Arellano, Manuel & Bond, Stephen, 1991. "Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(2), pages 277-97, April.
  9. Serge Coulombe, 2001. "Human Capital, Urbanization, and Canadian Provincial Growth," Working Papers 0105E, University of Ottawa, Department of Economics.
  10. Gasper A. Garofalo & Steven Yamarik, 2002. "Regional Convergence: Evidence From A New State-By-State Capital Stock Series," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(2), pages 316-323, May.
  11. Shioji, Etsuro, 2001. " Public Capital and Economic Growth: A Convergence Approach," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 205-27, September.
  12. Johnson, Paul, 1999. "A Nonparametric Analysis of Income Convergence Across the US States," Vassar College Department of Economics Working Paper Series 46, Vassar College Department of Economics.
  13. Gerald Carlino & Leonard Mills, 1994. "Convergence and the U.S states: a time series analysis," Working Papers 94-13, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
  14. Bruce E. Hansen, 1996. "Sample Splitting and Threshold Estimation," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 319., Boston College Department of Economics, revised 12 May 1998.
  15. Michael Funke & Annekatrin Niebuhr, 2005. "Regional Geographic Research and Development Spillovers and Economic Growth: Evidence from West Germany," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 143-153.
  16. Azariadis, Costas & Drazen, Allan, 1990. "Threshold Externalities in Economic Development," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 105(2), pages 501-26, May.
  17. Ronald Moomaw & J. Mullen & Martin Williams, 2002. "Human and knowledge capital: A contribution to the empirics of state economic growth," Atlantic Economic Journal, International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 30(1), pages 48-60, March.
  18. Islam, Nazrul, 1995. "Growth Empirics: A Panel Data Approach," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 110(4), pages 1127-70, November.
  19. Somik V. Lall & Serdar Yilmaz, 2001. "Regional economic convergence: Do policy instruments make a difference?," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 153-166.
  20. G. S. Maddala & S. Wu, 2000. "Cross-country growth regressions: problems of heterogeneity, stability and interpretation," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(5), pages 635-642.
  21. Paul Evans, 1997. "How Fast Do Economies Converge?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 79(2), pages 219-225, May.
  22. N. Gregory Mankiw & David Romer & David N. Weil, 1990. "A Contribution to the Empirics of Economic Growth," NBER Working Papers 3541, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  23. Jonathan R. W. Temple, 1998. "Robustness tests of the augmented Solow model," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(4), pages 361-375.
  24. Holtz-Eakin, Douglas, 1993. "Solow and States: Capital Accumulation, Productivity, and Economic Growth," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 46(4), pages 425-39, December.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:regstd:v:40:y:2006:i:6:p:571-582. 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: (Michael McNulty)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.