GROWTH AND STRUCTURAL CHANGES IN TRANSITION COUNTRIES: THE CHICKEN OR THE EGG? - Publication - Bridge of Knowledge

Your account

login

Search

GROWTH AND STRUCTURAL CHANGES IN TRANSITION COUNTRIES: THE CHICKEN OR THE EGG?

Abstract

The objective of this study is to test empirically the relationship between structural changes (changes in gross value added and employment) and economic growth. We used a panel Granger-causality analysis based on annual data for eight transition countries, covering the period 1995–2011. The main finding is that the causality relations analysed are heterogeneous processes and are identified more often when we measure structural changes by value added than by changes in employment. Among the countries analysed, we separate a subgroup of economies with very strong bilateral causality (small countries such as Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia), a subgroup in which no causal relationships are observed (e.g., Hungary in the case of employment), and a group with a one-directional relationship (e.g., Poland, where GDP changes cause employment changes, but not vice versa). The research results point to the necessity of taking into account different relationships, whether one- or two-directional, between growth and structural changes in government economic policy. The paper presents a verifiable methodology, which was originally used to identify the analysed relationship in transition countries.

Citations

  • 8

    CrossRef

  • 0

    Web of Science

  • 8

    Scopus

Authors (2)

Cite as

Full text

download paper
downloaded 99 times
Publication version
Accepted or Published Version
License
Creative Commons: CC-BY open in new tab

Keywords

Details

Category:
Articles
Type:
artykuł w czasopiśmie wyróżnionym w JCR
Published in:
Journal of Business Economics and Management no. 19, edition 3, pages 544 - 565,
ISSN: 1611-1699
Language:
English
Publication year:
2018
Bibliographic description:
Olczyk M., Kordalska A.: GROWTH AND STRUCTURAL CHANGES IN TRANSITION COUNTRIES: THE CHICKEN OR THE EGG?// Journal of Business Economics and Management. -Vol. 19, iss. 3 (2018), s.544-565
DOI:
Digital Object Identifier (open in new tab) 10.3846/jbem.2018.6580
Bibliography: test
  1. Acemoglu, D., & Guerrieri, V. (2008). Capital deepening and nonbalanced economic growth. Journal of Political Economy, 116(3), 467-498. https://doi.org/10.1086/589523 open in new tab
  2. Aghion, P., & Howitt, P. (1998). Endogenous growth theory. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  3. Aiginger, K. (2001). Speed of change and growth of manufacturing. In M. Peneder, K. Aiginger, & M. Marterbauer (Eds.), Structural changes and economic growth (pp. 53-86). Vienna: Austrian Institute of Economic Research. open in new tab
  4. Arellano, M., & Bond, S. (1991). Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Review of Economic Studies, 58(2), 277-297. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297968 open in new tab
  5. Arellano, M., & Bover, O. (1995). Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-compo- nents models. Journal of Econometrics, 68(1), 29-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)01642-D open in new tab
  6. Ball, L., Jalles, J. T., & Loungani, P. (2015). Do forecasters believe in Okun's Law? An assessment of unemployment and output forecasts. International Journal of Forecasting, 31(1), 176-184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijforecast.2014.03.009 open in new tab
  7. Baltagi, B. H. (2008). Econometric analysis of panel data. Chichester: Wiley.
  8. Baumol, W. J. (1967). Macroeconomics of unbalanced growth: the anatomy of urban crisis. American Economic Review, 57(3), 415-426.
  9. Baumol, W. J., Blackman, S. A. B., & Wolff, E. N. (1985). Unbalanced growth revisited: asymptotic stagnancy and new evidence. American Economic Review, 75(4), 806-817.
  10. Beck, N., & Katz, J. (2009). Modeling dynamics in time-series-cross-section political economy data. An- nual Review of Political Science, 14, 331-352. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-071510-103222 open in new tab
  11. Białowąs, T. (2016). Zmiany strukturalne a wzrost gospodarczy krajów Europy Środkowej. Rocznik Instytutu Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej, 14(5), 121-139 (in Polish).
  12. Blundell, R., & Bond, S. (1998). Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics, 87(1), 115-143. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(98)00009-8 open in new tab
  13. Breitung, J. (2001). The local power of some unit root tests for panel data. In B. H. Baltagi, T. B. Fom- by, & R. C. Hill (Eds.), Nonstationary panels, panel cointegration, and dynamic panels advances in econometrics (pp. 161-177). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. open in new tab
  14. Bruno, G. S. F. (2005). Estimation and inference in dynamic unbalanced panel-data models with a small number of individuals. Stata Journal, 5(4), 473-500. open in new tab
  15. Caselli, F., & Coleman, W. J. (2001). Cross-country technology diffusion: the case of computers. Ameri- can Economic Review, 91(2), 328-335. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.91.2.328 open in new tab
  16. Chamberlain, G. (1984). Panel data. In Z. Griliches & M. D. Intriligator (Eds.), Handbook of Econo- metrics, 2, 1247-1318. open in new tab
  17. Chenery, H. (1960). Patterns of industrial growth. American Economic Review, 50(4), 624-654. open in new tab
  18. Chenery, H. B., Robinson, S., & Syrquin, M. (1986). Industrialization and growth: a comparative study. Washington DC: World Bank.
  19. Choe, J. I. (2003). Do foreign direct investment and gross domestic investment promote economic growth? Review of Development Economics, 7(1), 44-57. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9361.00174 open in new tab
  20. Clark, C. (1940). The conditions of economic progress. London: Macmillan.
  21. Cortuk, O., & Singh, N. (2010). Structural change and growth in India. Working Papers, UC Santa Cruz Economics Department 663. open in new tab
  22. Dietrich, A. (2012). Does growth cause structural change, or is it the other way around? A dynamic panel data analysis for seven OECD countries. Empirical Economics, 43(3), 915-944. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-011-0510-z open in new tab
  23. Dumitrescu, E., & Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Eco- nomic Modelling, 29(4), 1450-1460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2012.02.014 open in new tab
  24. Echevarria, C. (1997). Changes in sectoral composition associated with economic growth. International Economic Review, 38(2), 431-452. https://doi.org/10.2307/2527382 open in new tab
  25. Eichengreen, B., Park, D., & Shin, K. (2012). When fast-growing economies slow down: international evidence and implications for China. Asian Economic Papers, 11(1), 42-87. https://doi.org/10.1162/ASEP_a_00118 open in new tab
  26. Erdil, E., & Yetkiner, I. H. (2009). The Granger-causality between health care expenditure and output: a panel data approach. Applied Economics, 41(4), 511-518. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840601019083 open in new tab
  27. Felipe, J., Kumar, U., & Abdon, A. (2012). How rich countries became rich and why poor countries remain poor: it's the economic structure… duh! Working Paper No. 644. Annandale-on-Hudson, NY: Levy Economics Institute of Bard College. open in new tab
  28. Fisher, A. G. B. (1939). Production: primary, secondary and tertiary. Economic Record, 15(1), 24-38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4932.1939.tb01015.x open in new tab
  29. Fourastié, J. (1949). Le grand espoir du XXe siècle. Progrès technique, progrès économique, progrès social. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
  30. Granger, C. W. J. (1969). Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral me- thods. Econometrica, 37(3), 424-438. https://doi.org/10.2307/1912791 open in new tab
  31. Grossmann, G., & Helpman, H. (1991). Innovation and growth in the global economy. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  32. Havlik, P. (2013). Structural change and economic growth in the new EU member states. GRINCOH Working Paper P1.4. Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies. open in new tab
  33. Holtz-Eakin, D., Newey, W., & Rosen, H. (1985). Implementing causality tests with panel data, with an example from local public finance. NBER Technical Working Papers, No. 0048. open in new tab
  34. Hsiao, C. (1989). Modelling Ontario regional electricity system demand using a mixed fixed and ran- dom coefficients approach. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 19(4), 565-587. https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-0462(89)90020-3 open in new tab
  35. Hurlin, C., & Venet, B. (2001). Granger causality tests in panel data models with fixed coefficients. EURIs- CO Université Paris Dauphine. open in new tab
  36. Hurlin, C. (2004). Testing Granger causality in heterogeneous panel data models with fixed coefficients. University Orléans.
  37. Im, K. S., Pesaran, M. H., & Shin, Y. (2003). Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. Journal of Econometrics, 115(1), 53-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(03)00092-7 open in new tab
  38. Ishikawa, S. (1987). Structural change. In J. Eatwell, M. Milgate, & P. Newman (Eds.), The new Palgrave: A dictionary of economics, 4, 523-525. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95121-5_1775-1 open in new tab
  39. Islam, N. (2001). Small sample performance of dynamic panel data estimators in estimating the growth- convergence equation: a Monte Carlo study. In B. H. Baltagi, T. B. Fomby, & R. Carter Hill (Eds.), Nonstationary panels, panel cointegration, and dynamic panels (pp. 317-339). Emerald Group Pub- lishing Limited. open in new tab
  40. Kiviet, J. F. (1995). On bias, inconsistency, and efficiency of various estimators in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics, 68(1), 53-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)01643-E open in new tab
  41. Kiviet, J. F. (1999). Expectation of expansions for estimators in a dynamic panel data model; some results for weakly exogenous regressors. In C. Hsiao, K. Lahiri, L.-F. Lee, & M. H. Pesaran (Eds.), Analysis of panel data and limited dependent variables (pp. 199-225). Cambridge: Cambridge Uni- versity Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511493140.010 open in new tab
  42. Kongsamut, P., Rebelo, S., & Xie, D. (2001). Beyond balanced growth. Review of Economic Studies, 68(4), 869-882. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-937X.00193 open in new tab
  43. Kuznets, S. (1959). On comparative study of economic structure and growth of nations. In R. W. Gold- smith (Ed.), The comparative study of economic growth and structure (pp. 162-176). National Bureau of Economic Research. open in new tab
  44. Laitner, J. (2000). Structural change and economic growth. Review of Economic Studies, 67(3), 545-561. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-937X.00143 open in new tab
  45. Lilien, D. M. (1982). Sectoral shifts and cyclical unemployment. Journal of Political Economy, 90(4), 777-793. https://doi.org/10.1086/261088 open in new tab
  46. Lucas, R. (1988). On the mechanics of economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 22(1), 3-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3932(88)90168-7 open in new tab
  47. Machlup, F. (1967). Essays in economic semantics. New York: W.W. Norton.
  48. Mahmood, T., & Linden, M. (2017). Structural change and economic growth in Schengen region. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 7(1), 303-311.
  49. Matsuyama, K. (2008). Structural change. In S. N. Durlauf, & L. E. Blume (Eds.), The new Palgrave dictionary of economics (2 nd ed.) (pp. 136-153). London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95121-5_1775-2 open in new tab
  50. Moon, H. R., & Perron, B. (2004). Testing for a unit root in panels with dynamic factors. Journal of Econometrics, 122(1), 81-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2003.10.020 open in new tab
  51. Nair-Reichert, U., & Weinhold, D. (2001). Causality tests for cross-country panels: a new look at FDI and economic growth in developing countries. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 63(2), 153-171. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0084.00214 open in new tab
  52. Ngai, L. R., & Pissarides, C. A. (2007). Structural change in a multisector model of growth. American Economic Review, 97(1), 429-443. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.97.1.429 open in new tab
  53. Nickell, S. (1981). Biases in dynamic models with fixed effects. Econometrica, 49(6), 1417-1426. https://doi.org/10.2307/1911408 open in new tab
  54. Nurkse, R. (1953). Problems of capital formation in underdeveloped countries. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. open in new tab
  55. OECD. (2016). Promoting productivity and equality: a twin challenge. OECD Economic Outlook, 2016(1), 59-84. Retrieved from http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/oecd-economic-outlook- volume-2016-issue-1/promoting-productivity-and-equality-a-twin-challenge_eco_outlook-v2016- 1-3-en/ open in new tab
  56. Ohno, K. (2009). Avoiding the middle income trap: renovating industrial policy formulation in Viet- nam. ASEAN Economic Bulletin, 26(1), 25-43. https://doi.org/10.1355/AE26-1C open in new tab
  57. Pasinetti, L. L. (1981). Structural change and economic growth: a theoretical essay on the dynamics of the wealth of nations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  58. Pesaran, H. (2003). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross section dependence. Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0346, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.457280 open in new tab
  59. Pissarides, C. (1990). Equilibrium unemployment theory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
  60. Raffinot, M., & Venet, B. (2017). Low income countries, credit rationing and debt relief: bye bye interna- tional financial market? Retrieved from https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01489954/.
  61. Romer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous technical changes. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), 71-102. https://doi.org/10.1086/261725 open in new tab
  62. Rosenstein-Rodan, P. N. (1943). Problems of industrialization of Eastern and South-Eastern Eu- rope. Economic Journal, 53(210), 202-211. https://doi.org/10.2307/2226317 open in new tab
  63. Schumpeter, J. (1934). Theory of economic development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  64. Semmler, W., Madrick, J., & Khemraj, T. (2006). Okun's law and jobless growth. New York: Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis. https://doi.org/10.13140/rg.2.1.4719.7522 open in new tab
  65. Silva, E. G., & Teixeira, A. C. (2008). Surveying structural change: seminal contributions and a biblio- metric account. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 19(4), 273-300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2008.02.001 open in new tab
  66. Solow, R. M. (1956). A contribution to the theory of economic growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 70(1), 65-94. https://doi.org/10.2307/1884513 open in new tab
  67. Solow, R. M. (1957). Technical change and the aggregate production function. Review of Economics and Statistics, 39(3), 312-320. open in new tab
  68. Soylu, Ö. B., Çakmak, I., & Okur, F. (2018). Economic growth and unemployment issue: Panel data analysis in Eastern European Countries. Journal of International Studies, 11(1), 93-107. https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-8330.2018/11-1/7 open in new tab
  69. Stamer, M. (1998). Interrelation between subsidies, structural changes and economic growth in Ger- many: a vector autoregressive analysis. Konjunkturpolitik, 44(3), 231-253.
  70. Stamer, M. (1999). Strukturwandel and wirtschaftliche Entwicklung in Deutschland, den USA and Japan. Aachen: Shaker.
  71. Syrquin, M. (2010). Kuznets and Pasinetti on the study of structural transformation: never the twain shall meet? Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 21(4), 248-257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2010.08.002 open in new tab
  72. Timmer, M. P., Dietzenbacher, E., Los, B., Stehrer, R., & de Vries, G. J. (2015). An illustrated user guide to the World Input-Output Database: the case of global automotive production. Review of Interna- tional Economics, 23(3), 575-605. https://doi.org/10.1111/roie.12178 open in new tab
  73. Weinhold, D. (1996). Investment, growth and causality testing in panels. Economie et Prévision, 126, 163-175. open in new tab
  74. Weinhold, D. (1999). A dynamic "fixed effects" model for heterogeneous panel data. London School of Economics.
  75. Wheatley, A. (2010). Avoiding the middle income trap. New York Times, 25 October. APPENDIX Appendix 1. Measures of structural changes (SCI, MLI) for GVA (right-hand axis) and employment (left-hand axis) open in new tab
  76. MLI -modified Lilien index; open in new tab
  77. RMSE -root mean squared error; open in new tab
  78. RSS -residual sum of squares; open in new tab
  79. SCI -structural change index; open in new tab
  80. VAR -vector autoregressive model; open in new tab
  81. WIOD -World Input-Output Database. open in new tab
Verified by:
Gdańsk University of Technology

seen 249 times

Recommended for you

Global Competitiveness and Economic Growth: A One-Way or Two-Way Relationship?

2016

Enhancing women’s engagement in economic activities through information and communication technology deployment: evidence from Central–Eastern European countries

2020

Global value chains and productivity gains: a cross-country analysis

2016

Fertility rebound and economic growth. New evidence for 18 countries over the period 1970-2011.

2015
Meta Tags