Knowledge, Technology and Economic Growth: Recent Evidence from OECD Countries

This paper discusses some of the recent developments in growth theory, doing so from the perspective of a small open economy. After setting out a basic generic model, we show how it may yield two of the key models that have played a prominent role in the recent literature, the endogenous growth model and the non-scale growth model. We focus initially on the former, emphasizing how the simplest such model leads to an equilibrium in which the economy is always on its balanced growth path. One aspect of the model is the importance of fiscal policy as a determinant of the equilibrium growth rate, an aspect that is discussed in detail. We also show how the endogeneity or otherwise of the labor supply is crucial in determining the equilibrium growth rate and its responsiveness to macroeconomic policy. But transitional dynamics are an important aspect of the growth process and indeed much research has been directed to determining the speed with which the economy converges to its balanced growth path. We discuss alternative ways that such transitional dynamics may be introduced. These include (i) restricted access to the world capital market; (ii) the introduction of government capital , and (iii) the two-sector production model, pioneered by Lucas. In the original analysis, the two capital goods relate to physical and human capital and in the international context these naturally can be identified with traded and nontraded capital, respectively. Criticism of the endogenous growth model has led to the development of the nonscale growth model. This too is characterized by transitional dynamics, which are more flexible than those of the corresponding endogenous growth model. This model is much closer to the neoclassical model; in particular, the long-run growth rate is independent of macroeconomic policy. However, since such models are typically associated with slow convergence speeds, policy can influence the accumulation of capital for extended periods of time, leading to significant long-run level effects. The discussion seeks to emphasize the adaptability of the models to a wide range of issues. A final extension addresses the impact of volatililty on growth. This has been extensively analyzed empirically and a stochastic extension of the endogenous growth model provides a convenient framework within which to interpret this research.

[1]  Paul A. David,et al.  COMPUTER AND DYNAMO: The Modern Productivity Paradox in a Not-Too Distant Mirror , 1989 .

[2]  Steven M. Fazzari,et al.  Financing Constraints and Corporate Investment , 1987 .

[3]  Boyan Jovanovic,et al.  Learning By Doing and the Choice of Technology , 1994 .

[4]  Optimality in a World of Progress and Learning , 1968 .

[5]  Paul Schreyer,et al.  Economic Growth in the OECD Area: Recent Trends at the Aggregate and Sectoral Level , 2000 .

[6]  Manuel Trajtenberg,et al.  A Time to Sow and a Time to Reap: Growth Based on General Purpose Technologies , 1994 .

[7]  Boyan Jovanovic,et al.  Entry, exit and diffusion with learning by doing , 1989 .

[8]  Eric J. Bartelsman,et al.  Downsizing and productivity growth: Myth or reality? , 1994 .

[9]  F. Fisher Embodied Technology and the Existence of Labour and Output Aggregates , 1968 .

[10]  Z. Griliches,et al.  The Explanation of Productivity Change , 1967 .

[11]  R. Solow TECHNICAL CHANGE AND THE AGGREGATE PRODUCTION FUNCTION , 1957 .

[12]  C. Bliss On Putty-Clay , 1968 .

[13]  Michael J. Harper,et al.  PRODUCTIVITY MEASUREMENT WITH CHANGING-WEIGHT INDEXES OF OUTPUTS AND INPUTS , 1996 .

[14]  The 'embodiment' controversy: A review essay , 1998 .

[15]  G. Bertola Labour Turnover Costs and Average Labour Demand , 1991 .

[16]  Michael Gort,et al.  An Economic Disturbance Theory of Mergers , 1969 .

[17]  M. Yorukoglu,et al.  The Information Technology Productivity Paradox , 1998 .

[18]  G. Nicoletti,et al.  Summary Indicators of Product Market Regulation with an Extension to Employment Protection Legislation , 1999 .

[19]  P. Diamond Technical Change and the Measurement of Capital and Output , 1965 .

[20]  Stephen D. Oliner,et al.  The Resurgence of Growth in the Late 1990s: Is Information Technology the Story? , 2000 .

[21]  F. Lichtenberg,et al.  The Effects of Leveraged Buyouts on Productivity and Related Aspects of Firm Behavior , 1989 .

[22]  P. Conway,et al.  Estimating Potential Output: A Semi-Structural Approach , 1997 .

[23]  Karl Whelan,et al.  Computers, Obsolescence, and Productivity , 2000, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[24]  M. Nadiri,et al.  Innovations and Technological Spillovers , 1993 .

[25]  P. Howitt,et al.  Endogenous Growth Theory , 1999 .

[26]  Per Krusell,et al.  Long-Run Implications of Investment-Specific Technological Change , 1995 .

[27]  Financing Constraints and Corporate Investment , 1988 .

[28]  D. Jorgenson,et al.  Raising the Speed Limit: U.S. Economic Growth in the Information Age , 2000 .

[29]  R. Barro,et al.  International Comparisons of Educational Attainment , 1993 .

[30]  C. Hulten,et al.  Growth Accounting When Technical Change is Embodied in Capital , 1992 .

[31]  B. Lundvall OECD's publikation: Technology and Productivity: the Challenge for Economic Policy , 1991 .

[32]  Dale W. Jorgenson,et al.  Productivity and U.S. Economic Growth , 1999 .

[33]  M. F.,et al.  Bibliography , 1985, Experimental Gerontology.

[34]  R. Tetlow,et al.  A Simple Multivariate Filter for the Measurement of Potential Output , 1992 .

[35]  Luigi Orsenigo,et al.  Innovation, Diversity and Diffusion: A Self-organisation Model , 1988 .

[36]  G. Nicoletti,et al.  Regulation and Labour Market Performance , 1999 .

[37]  Dale W. Jorgenson,et al.  The Embodiment Hypothesis , 1966, Journal of Political Economy.

[38]  A. Harvey,et al.  Detrending, stylized facts and the business cycle , 1993 .

[39]  S. Winter,et al.  An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change.by Richard R. Nelson; Sidney G. Winter , 1987 .

[40]  Boyan Jovanovic,et al.  Accounting for Growth , 1998 .

[41]  M. King,et al.  INVESTMENT AND TECHNICAL PROGRESS , 1992 .

[42]  D. Jorgenson Capital Theory and Investment Behavior , 1963 .

[43]  THE OECD JOBS STRATEGY: ASSESSING PERFORMANCE AND POLICY , 2001 .

[44]  F. Fisher Embodied Technical Change and the Existence of an Aggregate Capital Stock , 1965 .

[45]  P. Romer Endogenous Technological Change , 1989, Journal of Political Economy.

[46]  E. Prescott,et al.  Postwar U.S. Business Cycles: An Empirical Investigation , 1997 .

[47]  D. Jorgenson,et al.  The Quality of the U.S. Work Force, 1948-95 , 1999 .

[48]  Robert J. Barro,et al.  Notes on Growth Accounting , 1998 .

[49]  C. M. Paul,et al.  Cost Structure and the Measurement of Economic Performance , 1999 .

[50]  R. Barro,et al.  International Measures of Schooling Years and Schooling Quality , 1996 .

[51]  S. Winter,et al.  An evolutionary theory of economic change , 1983 .