IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hst/ghsdps/gd12-283.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Inspiration and Perspiration Factors in Economic Growth: The Former Soviet Union Area versus China (ca. 1920-2010)

Author

Listed:
  • Dmitry Didenko
  • Péter Földvári
  • Bas van Leeuwen

Abstract

In this paper we extend our previous studies (Didenko et al., 2012; Földvári et al., 2012; Van Leeuwen et al., 2011) on the role of conventional factors of production (fixed, or physical, and human forms of capital) and their productivity depending on their interrelations and economic development policies. Methodologically based on Solow (1956, 1957) and Mankiw, Romer, and Weil (1992) we apply our theoretical models on the factors of economic growth to compare China with the republics of the former Soviet Union and, to this end, create a new database for both regions. Following Krugman (1994), we decompose economic growth in perspiration (i.e. production factors) and inspiration (i.e. TFP, which consists in turn of technical efficiency of the production factors and a general production frontier) factors and find that in the socialist central-planning period economic growth was largely driven by physical and, to lesser extent, human capital accumulation. Moreover, at these times conventional TFP change was strongly negative (1930s for the FSU, 1950s for China). This means that focusing mainly on physical capital increases the factors of production (hence increasing growth via perspiration) but reduces the technical efficiency of the factors of production strongly (hence lowers the growth via TFP, i.e. inspiration). After the economic transitions were launched (end 1970s in China and end 1980s in the FSU) the inspiration/perspiration pattern changed. China managed to keep technical inefficiency relatively moderate, largely by massively increasing its human capital (which made it easier to make use of physical capital). At the same time, they managed to increase their productivity frontier. In the FSU, however, the change in the human to physical capital ratio was primarily caused not by an increase of human-, but rather by a decrease of physical capital. This means that, even though technical efficiency relatively increased, the general productivity frontier remained stable or declined. This changed in the late 1990s and the start of the 21th century when the FSU started to recover somewhat, only to reach the 1990 level.

Suggested Citation

  • Dmitry Didenko & Péter Földvári & Bas van Leeuwen, 2013. "Inspiration and Perspiration Factors in Economic Growth: The Former Soviet Union Area versus China (ca. 1920-2010)," Global COE Hi-Stat Discussion Paper Series gd12-283, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
  • Handle: RePEc:hst:ghsdps:gd12-283
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://gcoe.ier.hit-u.ac.jp/research/discussion/2008/pdf/gd12-283.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bas van Leeuwen & Peter Foldvari, 2008. "How much human capital does Eastern Europe have? Measurement methods and results," Post-Communist Economies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 189-201.
    2. Van Leeuwen, Bas & van Leeuwen-Li, Jieli & Foldvari, Peter, 2011. "Regional human capital in Republican and New China: Its spread, quality and effects on economic growth," MPRA Paper 43582, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Bas van Leeuwen & Peter Foldvari, 2008. "Human Capital and Economic Growth in Asia 1890-2000: A Time-series Analysis ," Asian Economic Journal, East Asian Economic Association, vol. 22(3), pages 225-240, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Péter Földvári & Bas van Leeuwen & Dmitry Didenko, 2015. "Capital formation and economic growth under central planning and transition: A theoretical and empirical analysis, ca. 1920–2008," Acta Oeconomica, Akadémiai Kiadó, Hungary, vol. 65(1), pages 27-50, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    factors of production; human capital; productivity; technology; economic development; socialism; USSR; China;

    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:hst:ghsdps:gd12-283. 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: (Tatsuji Makino). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/iehitjp.html .

    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 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.

    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.