A reassessment of total factor productivity convergence: Evidence from cross-country analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 82 ◽  
pp. 87-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Badri Narayan Rath ◽  
Vaseem Akram
Keyword(s):  
Total Factor Productivity ◽  
Factor Productivity ◽  
Productivity Convergence ◽  
Country Analysis ◽  
Cross Country

scholarly journals Measuring Total Factor Productivity: Accounting for cross country differences in income per capita // Мјерење укупне факторске продуктивности: обрачун међудржавних разлика у БДП-у по раднику

2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (19) ◽  
pp. 75
Author(s):  
Stevo Pucar ◽  
Zoran Borovic
Keyword(s):  
Total Factor Productivity ◽  
Factor Productivity ◽  
Productivity Measurement ◽  
Production Factors ◽  
First Pass ◽  
Development Accounting ◽  
Proximate Determinants ◽  
Country Differences ◽  
Cross Country ◽  
The Cross

Summary: Why are some countries so much richer than others? Why do some countries produce so much more output per worker than others? Influential works by Klenow & Rodriguez-Clare (1997), Hall and Jones (1999), and Parente & Prescott (2000), among others, have argued that most of the cross country differences in output per worker is explained by differences in total factor productivity. Total factor productivity measurement enables researchers to determine the contribution of supply-side production factors to economic growth. Development Accounting is a first-pass attempt at organizing the answer around two proximate determinants: factors of production and efficiency. It answers the question “how much of the cross-country income variance can be attributed to differences in (physical and human) capital, and how much to differences in the efficiency with which capital is used’’?In this article, we will outline framework for growth accounting to account for cross-country difference in income of Republic of Srpska, Republic of Croatia and Republic of Serbia. The current consensus is that differences in income per worker across countries do not arise primarly from differences in quantities in capital or labour, but rather from differences in efficiency with which are these factors used. We find that total factor productivity is very important for the growth of output per worker, but only in cases of Serbia and Croatia. In case of Srpska the most important factor for the growth of output per worker is growth of capital.Резиме: Зашто су неке земље толико богатије од других? Зашто неке земље остварују много већи обим производње по раднику од других? Утицајни радови Klenow и Rodriguez-Clare (1997), Hall и Jones (1999), и Parente и Prescott (2000), између осталих, тврдили су да је највећи број међудржавних разлика у обиму производње по раднику резултат разлика у Укупној Факторској Продуктивности. Мјерење Укупне Факторске Продуктивности омогућава истраживачима да утврде допринос фактора на страни понуде привредном расту. Развој ‘’рачуноводства раста’’ представља први покушаја анализирања двије сродне детерминанте раста: фактори производње и ефикасности.  Ова анализа даје одговор на питање “колико су међудржавне разлике у оствареном БДП-у резултат међудржавних разлика у (физичком и људском) капиталу, а колико су резултат разлика у ефикасности којом се капитал користи’’?У овом раду ћемо приказати оквир за “рачуноводство раста’’ који ће се примјенити за обрачун међудржавних разлика у БДП-у по раднику за Републику Српску, Републику Хрватску и Републику Србију. Тренутни консензус међу ауторима је да разлике у БДП-у по раднику између земаља не настају првенствено због разлика у количинама капитала или рада, него због разлика у ефикасности са којом се ови фактори користе. Анализом смо дошли до закључка да је Укупна Факторска Продуктивност веома важна за раст производње по раднику, али само у случајевима Србије и Хрватске. У случају Српске најважнији фактор за раст производње по раднику је раст техничко-технолошке опремљености рада капиталом.

scholarly journals Finance and Development: A Tale of Two Sectors

2011 ◽  
Vol 101 (5) ◽  
pp. 1964-2002 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco J Buera ◽  
Joseph P Kaboski ◽  
Yongseok Shin
Keyword(s):  
Quantitative Analysis ◽  
Total Factor Productivity ◽  
Financial Frictions ◽  
Substantial Part ◽  
Factor Productivity ◽  
Country Differences ◽  
Cross Country ◽  
Relative Productivity ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Two Sectors

We develop a quantitative framework to explain the relationship between aggregate/sector-level total factor productivity (TFP) and financial development across countries. Financial frictions distort the allocation of capital and entrepreneurial talent across production units, adversely affecting measured productivity. In our model, sectors with larger scales of operation (e.g., manufacturing) have more financing needs, and are hence disproportionately vulnerable to financial frictions. Our quantitative analysis shows that financial frictions account for a substantial part of the observed cross-country differences in output per worker, aggregate TFP, sector-level relative productivity, and capital-to-output ratios. (JEL E23, E44, O41, O47)

scholarly journals Agricultural Convergence Clubs in Africa Countries: A Note

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kolawole Ogundari
Keyword(s):  
Agricultural Productivity ◽  
Agricultural Technology ◽  
Population Divergence ◽  
Factor Productivity ◽  
Club Convergence ◽  
Productivity Convergence ◽  
Convergence Clubs ◽  
Show Evidence ◽  
Cross Country ◽  
African Agriculture

Abstract The study investigates productivity club convergence to assess whether countries follow different African agriculture convergence trajectories. We employ cross country panel covering 1961-2012 across 48 countries with total factor productivity (TFP) as an indicator of agricultural productivity in the study. Empirical results show evidence of population divergence in agricultural TFP. Further analysis shows evidence of club convergence as countries follow different convergence trajectories. Specifically, the result identifies three different transition groups in the region's agricultural productivity convergence. Countries in the first and two groups show a convergence path, while countries in the third group exhibit a divergence path. A total of 16 and 28 countries in the sample converge into the first and second clubs. The implication of this is that efforts to intensify agricultural productivity might require club-specific attention. For instance, new agricultural technology diffusion might focus on countries within a specific club or group.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document