Transitional Dynamics And Economic Growth In The Neoclassical Model
An understanding of the qualitative nature of the transitional dynamics of the neociassical model - the process of convergence from an initial capital stock to a steady state growth path - is a key part of the shared knowledge of most economists. It forms the basis, for example, of the widespread interest in hypotheses about convergence of levels of national economic activity. Based on several quantitative experiments undertaken in the 1960s with fixed savings rates versions of the neoclassical model, many economists further believe that the transition process can be lengthy, potentially rationalizing differences in growth rates across countries that are sustained for decades. In this paper, we undertake a systematic quantitative investigation of transitional dynamics within the most widely employed versions of the neoclassical model with interteorally optimizing households. Lengthy transitional episodes arise only if there is very low intertemporal substitution. But, more important, we find that the simplest neoclassical model inevitably generates a central implication that is traced to the production technology. Whenever we try to use it to explain major growth episodes, the model produces a rate of return that is counterfactually high in the early stages of development. For example, in seeking to account for U.S-Japan differences in post war growth as a consequence of differences in end-of-war capital, we find that the immediate postwar rate of return in Japan would have had to exceed 500% per annum. Frequently employed variants of the basic neoclassical model - those that introduce adjustment costs, separate production and consumption sectors, and international capital mobility - can potentially sweep this marginal product implication under the rug. However, such alterations necessarily cause major discrepancies to arise in other areas. With investment adjustment costs, for example, the implications resurface in counterfactual variations in Tobin's Q. We interpr
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.
|Date of creation:||1989|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: University of Rochester, Center for Economic Research, Department of Economics, Harkness 231 Rochester, New York 14627 U.S.A.|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:roc:rocher:206. 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: (Richard DiSalvo)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.