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

Population growth and endogenous technological change: Australian economic growth in the long run

  • Banerjee, Rajabrata

The Australian growth experience appears to be a three-act phenomenon, with higher per capita income and living standards before 1890 and after 1940, disconnected by a 50-year period of no trend improvement in between. This paper examines the roles of technological progress and population growth in Australian productivity growth over the past two centuries. The empirical results confirm that while population growth had a negative effect, innovative activity had a positive effect on productivity growth. Furthermore, the estimates strongly support the Schumpeterian growth hypothesis, which predicts that productivity growth is driven by the levels of research intensity in the economy.

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://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/30892/1/MPRA_paper_30892.pdf
File Function: original version
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 30892.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Mar 2011
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:30892
Contact details of provider: Postal: Schackstr. 4, D-80539 Munich, Germany
Phone: +49-(0)89-2180-2219
Fax: +49-(0)89-2180-3900
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de

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. Robert E. Lucas, Jr., 2007. "Trade and the Diffusion of the Industrial Revolution," NBER Working Papers 13286, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  2. Ian W. Mclean, 2004. "Australian Economic Growth in Historical Perspective," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 80(250), pages 330-345, 09.
  3. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  4. Johansen, Soren, 1988. "Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 12(2-3), pages 231-254.
  5. Peter Howitt, 1999. "Steady Endogenous Growth with Population and R & D Inputs Growing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(4), pages 715-730, August.
  6. Jakob Madsen & Shishir Saxena & James Ang, 2008. "The Indian Growth Miracle And Endogenous Growth," Monash Economics Working Papers 17/08, Monash University, Department of Economics.
  7. Zivot, Eric & Andrews, Donald W K, 1992. "Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil-Price Shock, and the Unit-Root Hypothesis," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 10(3), pages 251-70, July.
  8. Madsen, Jakob B., 2007. "Are there diminishing returns to R&D?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 95(2), pages 161-166, May.
  9. Gary D. Hansen & Edward C. Prescott, 1998. "Malthus to Solow," NBER Working Papers 6858, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  10. Paul Romer, 1989. "Endogenous Technological Change," NBER Working Papers 3210, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  11. Jakob B. Madsen & James B. Ang & Rajabrata Banerjee, 2010. "Four Centuries of British Economic Growth: The Roles of Technology and Population," CAMA Working Papers 2010-18, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
  12. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth Through Creative Destruction," Scholarly Articles 12490578, Harvard University Department of Economics.
  13. Sullivan, Richard J., 1990. "The Revolution of Ideas: Widespread Patenting and Invention During the English Industrial Revolution," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 50(02), pages 349-362, June.
  14. Jones, Charles I, 1995. "Time Series Tests of Endogenous Growth Models," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 110(2), pages 495-525, May.
  15. Sullivan, Richard J., 1989. "England's Age of invention: The acceleration of patents and patentable invention during the industrial revolution," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 424-452, October.
  16. Peretto, P. & Smulders, J.A., 2002. "Technological distance, growth and scale effects," Other publications TiSEM bdce08a7-4ad9-4427-a99e-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
  17. Les Oxley & David Greasley, 1998. "Vector autoregression, cointegration and causality: testing for causes of the British industrial revolution," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(10), pages 1387-1397.
  18. Jakob Madsen, 2008. "Semi-endogenous versus Schumpeterian growth models: testing the knowledge production function using international data," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-26, March.
  19. Matteo Cervellati & Uwe Sunde, 2005. "Human Capital Formation, Life Expectancy, and the Process of Development," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(5), pages 1653-1672, December.
  20. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-51, March.
  21. Mackinnon, J.G. & Haug, A.A. & Michelis, L., 1996. "Numerical Distribution Functions of Likelihood Ratio Tests for Cointegration," G.R.E.Q.A.M. 96a09, Universite Aix-Marseille III.
  22. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
  23. Goodfriend, Marvin & McDermott, John, 1995. "Early Development," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(1), pages 116-33, March.
  24. David Greasley & Les Oxley, 1998. "A Tale of Two Dominions: Comparing the Macroeconomic Records of Australia and Canada Since 1870," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 51(2), pages 294-318, 05.
  25. Joonkyung Ha & Peter Howitt, 2007. "Accounting for Trends in Productivity and R&D: A Schumpeterian Critique of Semi-Endogenous Growth Theory," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 39(4), pages 733-774, 06.
  26. Crafts, Nicholas & Mills, Terence C., 2009. "From Malthus to Solow: How did the Malthusian economy really evolve?," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 68-93, March.
  27. James B. Ang & Rajabrata Banerjee & Jakob B. Madsen, 2010. "Innovation, Technological Change And The British Agricultural Revolution," CAMA Working Papers 2010-11, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
  28. Oxley, Les & Greasley, David, 1995. "A Time-Series Perspective on Convergence: Australia, UK and USA since 1870," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 71(214), pages 259-70, September.
  29. Jones, Charles I, 1995. "R&D-Based Models of Economic Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(4), pages 759-84, August.
  30. Greasley, David & Oxley, Les, 2007. "Patenting, intellectual property rights and sectoral outputs in Industrial Revolution Britain, 1780-1851," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 139(2), pages 340-354, August.
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:pra:mprapa:30892. 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: (Ekkehart Schlicht)

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.