IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Development and Underdevelopment in the Globalizing Economy

  • David Mayer-Foulkes

A development and underdevelopment is presented using a Schumpeterian model for an open global economy with technology transfer and trade. When in the context of free commerce there exist strong enough mechanisms allowing technological asymmetries between countries to generate higher innovation incentives for the leaders, persistent inequality and divergence will result. Identical countries will reach different steady states. Such mechanisms include labor- and market- seeking foreign direct investment (FDI), which originated at the end of the 19th Century and has increased rapidly since the 1980’s. They also include the typical “colonial diktat” imposed by Great Britain in the 19th and early 20th Centuries. In the presence of labor-seeking FDI, the advantage a leading country’s innovators obtains by producing with the follower’s wages results in higher incentives to innovation for which FDI spillovers may not compensate the follower. It also crowds out the follower’s innovation. In the case of a small following country all of whose labor is demanded by leading country innovators, all innovation will be crowded out (the banana republic). Market-seeking FDI, providing goods that can only be sold where they are produced, also results in unequal incentives to innovation. Finally, when colonies’ markets and transportation options are limited by their colonial masters, or competitive industries are directly outruled, as in the typical colonial diktat of the 19th Century, persistent inequality and divergence arise. In contrast, in the case of autarchy, or in the case of free commerce without any asymmetric mechanisms, multiple steady states will only arise when country parameters differ. In all cases considered, marginal changes in the steady state determinants, such as population size, productivity fixed effects and institutions (represented by the degree of financial development and by the efficiency of a public input for producing innovated goods) result in growth effects for diverging countries and level effects for countries following the leader in parallel trajectories.

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://degit.sam.sdu.dk/papers/degit_10/C010_005.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade in its series DEGIT Conference Papers with number c010_005.

as
in new window

Length: 48 pages
Date of creation: Jun 2005
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:deg:conpap:c010_005
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Niels Bohrs Vej 9, 6700 Esbjerg

Phone: +45 6550 2233
Fax: +45 6550 1090
Web page: http://degit.sam.sdu.dk/
Email:


More information through EDIRC

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. Ross Levine & Norman Loayza & Thorsten Beck, 2002. "Financial Intermediation and Growth: Causality and Causes," Central Banking, Analysis, and Economic Policies Book Series, in: Leonardo Hernández & Klaus Schmidt-Hebbel & Norman Loayza (Series Editor) & Klaus Schmidt-Hebbel (Se (ed.), Banking, Financial Integration, and International Crises, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 2, pages 031-084 Central Bank of Chile.
  2. Peter Klenow & Andrés Rodríguez-Clare, 1997. "The Neoclassical Revival in Growth Economics: Has It Gone Too Far?," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1997, Volume 12, pages 73-114 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. David Mayer-Foulkes & Peter Nunnenkamp, 2009. "Do Multinational Enterprises Contribute to Convergence or Divergence? A Disaggregated Analysis of US FDI ," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(2), pages 304-318, 05.
  4. Daron Acemoglu & Philippe Aghion & Fabrizio Zilibotti, 2002. "Distance to Frontier, Selection, and Economic Growth," NBER Working Papers 9066, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. Luiz de Mello, 1997. "Foreign direct investment in developing countries and growth: A selective survey," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(1), pages 1-34.
  6. Malcolm Knight & Norman Loayza & Delano Villanueva, 1993. "Testing the Neoclassical Theory of Economic Growth: A Panel Data Approach," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 40(3), pages 512-541, September.
  7. Edward C. Prescott, 1997. "Needed: a theory of total factor productivity," Staff Report 242, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
  8. Robert J. Barro, 1989. "Economic Growth in a Cross Section of Countries," NBER Working Papers 3120, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  9. N. Gregory Mankiw & David Romer & David N. Weil, 1992. "A Contribution to the Empirics of Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 107(2), pages 407-437.
  10. Feyrer James D, 2008. "Convergence by Parts," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-35, July.
  11. Philippe Aghion & Peter Howitt & David Mayer-Foulkes, 2004. "The Effect of Financial Development on Convergence: Theory and Evidence," NBER Working Papers 10358, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  12. Durlauf, Steven N & Johnson, Paul A, 1995. "Multiple Regimes and Cross-Country Growth Behaviour," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(4), pages 365-84, Oct.-Dec..
  13. Howitt, Peter & Mayer-Foulkes, David, 2005. "R&D, Implementation, and Stagnation: A Schumpeterian Theory of Convergence Clubs," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 37(1), pages 147-77, February.
  14. Evans, Paul, 1996. "Using cross-country variances to evaluate growth theories," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 20(6-7), pages 1027-1049.
  15. Pritchett, Lant, 1995. "Divergence, big time," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1522, The World Bank.
  16. David L. Carr & James R. Markusen & Keith E. Maskus, 2001. "Estimating the Knowledge-Capital Model of the Multinational Enterprise," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(3), pages 693-708, June.
  17. 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.
  18. Galor, Oded, 1996. "Convergence? Inferences from Theoretical Models," CEPR Discussion Papers 1350, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  19. Baumol, William J & Wolff, Edward N, 1988. "Productivity Growth, Convergence, and Welfare: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(5), pages 1155-59, December.
  20. Holger Görg & David Greenaway, 2004. "Much Ado about Nothing? Do Domestic Firms Really Benefit from Foreign Direct Investment?," World Bank Research Observer, World Bank Group, vol. 19(2), pages 171-197.
  21. Bernanke, Ben & Gertler, Mark, 1989. "Agency Costs, Net Worth, and Business Fluctuations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(1), pages 14-31, March.
  22. Borensztein, E. & De Gregorio, J. & Lee, J-W., 1998. "How does foreign direct investment affect economic growth?1," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 115-135, June.
  23. Khawar Mariam, 2005. "Foreign Direct Investment and Economic Growth: A Cross-Country Analysis," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-14, March.
  24. Xu, Bin, 2000. "Multinational enterprises, technology diffusion, and host country productivity growth," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 477-493, August.
  25. Magnus Blomstrom & Robert E. Lipsey & Mario Zejan, 1992. "What Explains Developing Country Growth?," NBER Working Papers 4132, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
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:deg:conpap:c010_005. 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: (Jan Pedersen)

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.