IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

A panel technique for the analysis of technology convergence: The case of the Italian regions

Listed author(s):
  • Adriana Di Liberto


  • Roberto Mura


  • Francesco Pigliaru


Differences in productivity levels represent a major component of the large cross-country differences in per capita income observed in international datasets and even in some regional ones. Nowadays, few economists would dispute neither this finding, nor that differences in productivity reflects – among other things – differences in technology levels. More controversial is the question of whether such differences in technology are stationary or temporary – that is, whether technology convergence is taking place, at what speed, under what conditions. This state of affairs is the result of several different difficulties faced by the empirical analysis on cross-country differences in per capita income growth rates. Recently, things have improved on both the analytical and the empirical side. On the analytical side, simple models in which technology convergence and capital-deepening can be studied within a common framework are now available. In these models the transitional dynamics is simple enough to be useful for empirical analysis [for instance, De la Fuente (1996) and (1997)]. On the empirical side, Islam (1995) has shown that we can test for the presence of technology heterogeneity in cross-country convergence analysis by using an appropriate fixed-effect panel estimator. The contribution of the present paper is on the empirical side. We propose a method designed to test whether part of the observed economic convergence is due to technology convergence. The method is based on the contribution by Islam (1995), but it extends it as follows. Islam’s technique was originally designed – and is currently applied – to measure cross-country differences in technology levels, assuming that such (relative) differences are at their stationary values and therefore that no technology convergence is present. The extension proposed in this paper builds on the a standard implication of models of technology convergence. If such convergence is present, the cross-sectional variance of the logs of our measure of technology should decreases over time approaching its stationary value. Alternatively, if technology convergence is absent, the variance is at its stationary value and no significant time-trend should be detected in its value. We exploit this difference to test for the presence of technology convergence in the data. First, we estimate the convergence equation over several sub-periods and use the values of the individual intercepts to compute the TFP levels. Then, we obtain the cross-section variance of the logs of our measures of TFP for each sub-period, and check whether the observed pattern is consistent either with catching-up hypothesis or with the hypothesis that the current degree of technology heterogeneity is at its stationary value. In this paper we use a panel dataset of the Italian regions, 1960-95. We apply our proposed methodology to the Italian case because it is notoriously characterized by a remarkable degree of regional heterogeneity. In spite of being one of the best known cases of regional divide, no explicit analysis of technology convergence across Italian regions is available yet. We use dynamic panel techniques (LSDV and GMM) to estimates our growth regressions. We split the whole sample period in several sub-periods to check for the presence of technology convergence. Our preliminary results reveal a significant presence of technology convergence, which reached its peak between the first and the second sub-period, and stayed significant but at a slower pace in later sub-periods. The emerging picture points to the simultaneous presence of technology convergence in a context otherwise characterized by weak output per-worker convergence. This is consistent with some recent results based on international datasets (e.g. Dowrick and Rogers [OEP (2002]).

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:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by European Regional Science Association in its series ERSA conference papers with number ersa03p293.

in new window

Date of creation: Aug 2003
Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa03p293
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Welthandelsplatz 1, 1020 Vienna, Austria

Web page:

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.:

in new window

  1. Robert E. Hall & Charles I. Jones, 1999. "Why do Some Countries Produce So Much More Output Per Worker than Others?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 114(1), pages 83-116.
  2. R. Paci & F. Pigliaru, 2001. "Technological Diffusion, Spatial Spillovers And Regional Convergence In Europe," Working Paper CRENoS 200101, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
  3. Stephen Bond & Anke Hoeffler & Jonathan Temple, 2001. "GMM Estimation of Empirical Growth Models," Economics Papers 2001-W21, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
  4. R. Pala & E. Marrocu & R. Paci, 2000. "Estimation of total factor productivity for regions and sectors in Italy. A panel cointegration approach," Working Paper CRENoS 200016, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
  5. Robert E. Lucas, 2000. "Some Macroeconomics for the 21st Century," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 159-168, Winter.
  6. Klenow, Peter J. & Rodriguez-Clare, Andres, 1997. "Economic growth: A review essay," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 597-617, December.
  7. 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.
  8. 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 363-389, September.
  9. Jan Fagerberg & Bart Verspagen, 1996. "Heading for Divergence? Regional Growth in Europe Reconsidered," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(3), pages 431-448, 09.
  10. Steve Dowrick & Mark Rogers, 2002. "Classical and technological convergence: beyond the Solow-Swan growth model," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 54(3), pages 369-385, July.
  11. Graziani, Augusto, 1978. "The Mezzogiorno in the Italian Economy," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 2(4), pages 355-372, December.
  12. Adriana Di Liberto & James Symons, 2003. "Some Econometric Issues in Convergence Regressions," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 71(3), pages 293-307, 06.
  13. Nazrul Islam, 2003. "Productivity Dynamics in a Large Sample of Countries: A Panel Study," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 49(2), pages 247-272, June.
  14. Nazrul Islam, 1995. "Growth Empirics: A Panel Data Approach," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 110(4), pages 1127-1170.
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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa03p293. 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: (Gunther Maier)

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.