1 convergence and divergence in the global economy university of hull
TRANSCRIPT
1
Convergence and Divergence in the Global Economy
University of Hull
2
GDP Perhead in Hull and the UK 1998
12,548 12,84511,75911,850
10,051
13,402
18,566
12,117
9,754 10,063
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
Unite
d K
ingdom
E
ast R
idin
g a
nd N
ort
h
Lin
coln
shire
E
ast R
idin
g o
f Y
ork
shire
L
ondon
N
ort
hern
Ire
land5
3
Figure 16.5a USA; GDP per capita, international 1990 G-K dollars
USA; per capita GDP (1990 G-K $), log scale
1000
10000
100000
1870 1900 1930 1960 1990year
per
capi
ta G
DP
Charles G. M. van Marrewijk
4
Figure 16.5b France, share of income invested
France, share of income invested, 1950-2000 (%)
0
10
20
30
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000year
inco
me
sh
are
inve
ste
d (
%)
average
5
Figure 16.6 Steady state equilibrium in the neoclassical growth model
0
1
2
3
0 5 10 15 20
capital-labor ratio k
tkn)(
E
G
F
tks
6
Figure 16.7 ‘Explained’ growth & Solow residual. (a) USA ‘explained’ economic growth (%)
a. USA 'explained' economic growth, 1970-2003 (%)
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
labour force
capital stock
total
7
Figure 16.7 ‘Explained’ growth & Solow residual. (b) USA actual growth & Solow residual
b. USA actual growth and Solow residual, 1970-2003 (%)
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
GDP
Solow residual
8
Figure 16.8 Log income per capita I, 1990 G-K $
6
7
8
9
10
1870 1890 1910 1930 1950 1970 1990
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Canada
a
6
7
8
9
10
1870 1890 1910 1930 1950 1970 1990
Denmark
France
Finland
Germany
b
9
Figure 16.8 Log income per capita I, 1990 G-K $
6
7
8
9
10
1870 1890 1910 1930 1950 1970 1990
ItalyNorw ay
Netherlands
Japan
c
6
7
8
9
10
1870 1890 1910 1930 1950 1970 1990
USA
UK
Sw itzerlan
Sw eden
d
10
Figure 16.9 Log income per capita II, 1990 G-K $
5
6
7
8
9
10
1870 1890 1910 1930 1950 1970 1990
Argentina
BrazilChile
Bangladesh
a
5
6
7
8
9
10
1870 1890 1910 1930 1950 1970 1990
Colombia
Indonesia India
China
b
11
Figure 16.9 Log income per capita II, 1990 G-K $
5
6
7
8
9
10
1870 1890 1910 1930 1950 1970 1990
Korea
Peru
Mexico
Pakistan
c
5
6
7
8
9
10
1870 1890 1910 1930 1950 1970 1990
Taiw an
Philippines
Thailand
d
12
Figure 16.10 Evolution of Nt and xt over time
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
0 2 4 6 8 10
Number of varieties N
Pro
duct
ion
leve
l of
varie
ty x
t0
t1
t2
13
Figure 16.11 Evolution of agglomeration, the Herfindahl index
Herfindahl index
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0 200 400 600 800
reallocation
14
Figure 16.12 Dynamics of city size; cities 3, 6, and 9
Evolution of the share of manufacturing
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
3
6
9
3
66
6
9
15
Figure 16.13 Economic structure in France and the USA, 1970-2003
a. France; value added composition (% of GDP)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
valu
e a
dd
ed
(%
of G
DP
)
s ervices
m anufacturing
agriculture
16
Figure 16.13 Economic structure in France and the USA, 1970-2003
b. USA; value added composition (% of GDP)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
valu
e a
dd
ed
(%
of G
DP
)
s ervices
m anufacturing
agriculture
17
Figure 16.14 Economic structure in Brazil, China, and India, 1960-2003
a. Brazil; value added composition (% of GDP)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
valu
e a
dd
ed
(%
of G
DP
)
s ervices
m anufacturing
agriculture
18
Figure 16.14 Economic structure in Brazil, China, and India, 1960-2003
b. China; value added composition (% of GDP)
0
10
20
30
40
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
valu
e a
dd
ed
(%
of G
DP
)
s ervices
m anufacturing
agriculture
19
Figure 16.14 Economic structure in Brazil, China, and India, 1960-2003
c. India; value added composition (% of GDP)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
valu
e a
dd
ed
(%
of G
DP
)
s ervices
m anufacturing
agriculture
20
Prediction of convergence underSolow Model: Catching up
High incomeIncomeY/P
Low income
Time
Growing apart
High income
Y/P
Divergence
Low ncome
Time
Meaning of Convergence and Divergence
A poor country should growat faster rate than a rich country as it has higher marginal productivity of capital.
Evidence from African Countries shows divergence.
21
Convergence Convergence
g g Time Time
Two concepts of Economic Convergence
1
lnln 2,
N
yyi
tti
t
Reduction in the standard deviation over time
Dispersion Measure: variance of growth rates should decline overtime
tY RRRt 10ln
LIHI11
Low income regions should grow faster than high income regions.
Mean Difference
22
MPKRMPKP
rp
rR
KRKP
Marginal productivity of Capital in Rich and Poor Countries and Capital Accumulation in Autarky
23
MPKRMPKP
rp
rR
KRKP
RG
Marginal productivity of Capital in Rich and Poor Countries and Capital Accumulation After Globalisation
rP
24
MPLRMPLP
wR’
LRLP
Marginal productivity of Labour in Rich and Poor Countries Before and After Globalisation
wR
LP’LR’
Rich CountryPoor Country
25
Who Gain and Who Lose From Globalisation?
MPLR
MPLR’
MPLP
MPLP’wp
wp’
wR
wR’
MPKR MPKP
rp
rR
Capitalists in rich countries and workers in poor countries gain.
26
1 1 and 10
10 and 1
K-Mobile
L-mobile K-Mobile L-mobile K-Mobile L-mobile
Convergence yes yes no yes yes Yes No convergence
no no yes no no no
iii LKAY
i
Factor Mobility and Convergence
27
Factors Promoting Convergence
• Domestic factors– Saving – Investment– Population growth rate– Human capital– Technology– Development of
infrastructure – Sound economic policy– Homogenous and stable
society– Transparent rules and
regulations
• Global factors– Trade of goods and
services– Inflow and outflow of
capital– Emigration or
immigration of skilled and unskilled labour
– Adoption of better technology
– Growth of the global economy
– Peace/Oil prices
28
Country A Country B 5.05.0AAA LKY
1.0A
2.0As What is the capital stock in the steady state in A in Autarky? How much do workers get? How much do owners of capital get?
AAAA KLsK 5.05.0
AA KK 1.0102.0 5.0
400AK
200AY
5.05.0BBB LKY
1.0B
0Bs What is the capital stock in the steady state in B in Autarky? How much do workers get? How much do owners of capital get?
BB KK 1.0100.0 5.0
0BK 0BY Becomes a beggar country.
Autarky and Saving and Capital (Gartner (2003:262) has similar example)
29
Country A Country B KKK BA
Country A saves for both countries. It receives rental income from country B.
KKKK 1.0105.0102.0 5.05.0
22515 2 K 15010225 5.05.05.0 AA LKY
GNP in country B = GDP+Investment Receipts GNPA = 150+75 = 225 Capitalists gain and workers lose in country A.
KKK BA Country B does not save but can borrow capital from country A.
15010225 5.05.05.0 BB LKY Country B need to pay capital income to Country A. GNP in country B = GDP- Investment Payments GNPB = 150-75 = 75 Country B gains from the capital transfers.
Impacts of Globalisation in Output and Income
What is the capital stock in the steady state in A and Bif there is a free mobility of capital?
30
GDP per capita (constant 1995 US$) 1960 2000 Y00/Y60 growth rate (1960-2000)
Austria 10596 32763 3.092016 2.822Belgium 10335 30830 2.983067 2.732Denmark 16287 38521 2.365138 2.152Finland 9769 32024 3.278125 2.968France 10611 29811 2.809443 2.582Greece 3818 13105 3.432425 3.083Hungary 1514 5425 3.584302 3.191Ireland 5462 27741 5.079002 4.063Italy 6606 20885 3.161663 2.878Luxembourg 15772 56372 3.574182 3.184Netherlands 11999 30966 2.580715 2.370Norway 11322 37954 3.352235 3.024Portugal 2735 12794 4.678735 3.858Spain 4620 17798 3.852798 3.372Sweden 13165 31206 2.370376 2.158Switzerland 26245 46737 1.780796 1.443United Kingdom 9496 21667 2.281698 2.062
Evidence of Convergence Among OECD economies
The
y ra
te g
row
ing
at a
bout
the
sam
e ra
te
31
1960 angrrateCentral African Republic457 -0.746708 1960 agrrateChad 290 -0.713465 China 112 4.989179Ghana 450 -0.2145 Hong Kong, China3008 5.214552Haiti 547 -0.997717 Ireland 5462 4.062741Madagascar 383 -1.106759 Korea, Rep. 1325 5.720737Nicaragua 638 -0.785382 Japan 8399 4.186912Niger 386 -1.606578 Malta 1177 5.404178Senegal 670 -0.238649 Portugal 2734 3.858026Sierra Leone 223 -1.041848 Singapore 2676 5.890155Venezuela, RB 3720 -0.299503 Thailand 465 4.492804Zambia 648 -1.256572
Lack of Evidence of Convergence among Low Income Countries and Convergence among newly emerging
economies: Average Annual Growth Rate of Per Capita Income (%) and Its level in 1960
Conditional Convergence
32
Results from Cross Country Growth Studies -1
• A low initial level of income is associated with higher growth rate in subsequent periods when other variables are held constant.
• Growth rates are higher when the ratio of investment to GDP is higher.
• Growth rates are higher in countries which have larger stock of human capital per capita.
• These are reflected in terms of enrolment in the primary and secondary schools.
• Population growth rates are negatively associated with growth rates.
33
Results from Cross Country Growth Studies -2
• Countries with distorted markets have lower growth rates.
• Distortions occur in exchange rates and prices or by impediments to a free and fair trade.
• Countries with efficient financial system have higher growth rates.
• Size of the financial markets is measured as a ratio of liquid assets to the GDP.
• Countries with political instability have lower growth rates.
• Frequency of revolutions, wars and coups are used to measure political instability.
34
The Facts of Growth – The Long Run
O. Blanchard
35
The Facts of Growth – The Long Run(Real GDP at Purchasing Power Parity)
Annual Growth Rate Real Output per CapitaOutput per Capita (%) (1992 dollars)
Ratio of Real OuputPer Capita
1950-1973 1973-1998 1950 1998 1998/1950
France 4.2 1.6 5,150 19,158 3.7
Germany 4.9 1.8 4,356 20,059 4.6
Japan 8.1 2.5 1,820 19,907 10.9
United Kingdom 2.5 1.9 6,870 19,005 2.8
United States 2.2 1.5 11,170 25,890 2.3
Average 4.4 1.9 5,872 20,804 3.5
36
Convergence
6
7
8
9
10
1890 1910 1930 1950 1970 1990
AustraliaUSA
France
Japan
Ch. van Marrewijk
37
The Facts of Growth – The Long Run
ObservationsObservations
• Strong growth 1950-1998
• Growth rates have decreased since the mid 1970s1950-1978 4.4% (GDP/capita doubles every 16 years)
1973-1998 1.9% (GDP/capita doubles every 37 years)
• Convergence in output/capita across countries???
38
The Facts of Growth – The Long Run
Convergence in Output/Capita – The OECDConvergence in Output/Capita – The OECD
39
The Facts of Growth – The Very Long Run
Looking across two millennia
• From the end of the Roman Empire to 1500, no output per capita growth in Europe
• 1500-1700 -- Small growth in output per capita (0.1%/year and 0.2%/year 1700 to 1820)
• 1820-1950 -- Modest growth (U.S. = 1.5%)
• The high-growth of the 1950s and 1960s is unusualLeaders in output/capita change frequently:
Italy Netherlands U.K. US
40
The Facts of Growth – The Long Run
Looking Across Lots of Countries – Convergence ???Looking Across Lots of Countries – Convergence ???
41
The Facts of Growth – The Long Run
Looking Across Countries – A Closer LookLooking Across Countries – A Closer Look