1

ITFD Growth and Development

LECTURE SLIDES SET 5

Professor Antonio Ciccone

2

III. Economic Growth with Human Capital and

Externalities

3

Outline

1. THE IMPORTANCE OF THE ROLE PLAYED BY CAPITAL IN PRODUCTION

2. A SIMPLE MODEL OF ENDOGENOUS GROWTH

3. EXTERNALITIES AND GROWTH

4. HUMAN CAPITAL AND GROWTH

4

1. THE IMPORTANCE OF THE ROLE PLAYED BY CAPITAL IN PRODUCTION

Let us return to the Solow model

• Savings a constant fraction s of income• Depreciation rate of capital is

• Population growth n• Rate of echnological progress a

5

PRODUCTION FUNCTION with DECREASING RETURNS TO CAPITAL

DECREASING RETURNS TO CAPITAL

CLOSE TO ZERO: STRONG DECREASING RETURNS

CLOSE TO UNITY: WEAK DECREASING RETURNS

1( , ) ( )F K L K AL

0 1

6

COBB-DOUGLAS PRODUCTION FUNCTION

1( )Y K AL

1 1 1( )MPK K AL k

(1 )MPK K MPK k

K MPK k MPK

7

k

MPK

STRONGDECREASING RETURNSTO CAPITAL

WEAKDECREASINGRETURNS

STRONG AND WEAK DECREASING RETURNS TO CAPITAL

8

Effect of savings rate on BGP income/capital under STRONG and WEAK decreasing

returns to capital

11,BGP t

BGPt t

K sk

A L n a

,

,

11

BGP t

BGP t

K ss K

• STRONG DECREASING RETURNS TO CAPITALSmall BGP effects of savings rate

• WEAK DECREASING RETURNS TO CAPITAL Large BGP effects of savings rate

9

1

BGPBGPs

y kn a

,

, 1BGP t

BGP t

Y ss Y

• STRONG DECREASING RETURNS TO CAPITALSmall BGP effects of savings rate

• WEAK DECREASING RETURNS TO CAPITAL Large BGP effects of savings rate

10

How much of international income differences explained by

“propensity of countries to accumulate”?

Depends on strength of decreasing returns to capital

11

Convergence to the BGP under WEAK and STRONG decreasing returns to capital

EQUILIBRIUM CAPITAL ACCUMULATION EQUATION

K sF(K , L) K

KK

sF(K , L)

K

12

( )K t

( , )F K Ls

K

*K

t

t

KK

CONVERGENCE UNDER STRONG DECREASING RETURNS TO CAPITAL

13

( )K t

( , )F K Ls

K

*K

t

t

KK

CONVERGENCE AND WEAK DECREASING RETURNS TO CAPITAL

14

INCOME CONVERGENCE EQUATION (CLOSE to balanced growth path)

(1 )( )(ln * ln )tt

t

ya n a y y

y

(1 )( ) ln *

(1 )( ) ln

t

t

t

ya n a y

y

n a y

growth between and

(determinants of BGP income)

convergence parameter ln(initial income)

t t T

f

15

Speed of convergence

• STRONG decreasing returns to capitalFAST convergence to BGP

• WEAK decreasing returns to capitalSLOW convergence to BGP

EMPIRICALLY, using cross-country data

16

REMEMBER THAT IN THE SOLOW MODEL

Elasticity of output with respect to capital

= Capital income share

= 1/3 (empirically)

=STRONG DECREASING RETURNS: Fast convergence to BGP

Small BGP level effects of savings rate

17

2. A SIMPLE MODEL OF ENDOGENOUS GROWTH

Return to the Solow model

• Savings a constant fraction s of income• Depreciation rate of capital is

• No population growth• No technological change

18

BUT BUT BUT NO DECREASING RETURNS TO CAPITAL(!)

Y AK

MPK A constant

where A is a CONSTANT

which implies

19

THIS PRODUCTION FUNCTION ALSO IMPLIES THAT

Elasticity of output with respect to capital

= Capital income share

• which is evidently in CONTRADICTION with empirical observation

• but let’s see where it leads us

1

20

EQUILIBRIUM CAPITAL ACCUMULATION EQUATION

K sAK K

K sA K

-- if sA>, CAPITAL per WORKER and therefore OUTPUT per WORKER grow forever, even if there is NO TECHNOLOGICAL PROGRESS

21

( )K t

Y AK KsAK

PERPETUAL CAPITAL ACCUMULATION WITHOUT TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE

22

Is there a BALANCED GROWTH PATH?(path where all variables grow at constant rate)

tK sAK K

KsA

K

To growth rate of capital

From equilibrium accumulation equation

23

To growth rate of output

Hence in this ENDOGENOUS GROWTH MODEL

1) long run growth in absence of technological progress

2) a higher savings rate means FASTER GROWTH IN the SHORT, MEDIUM, and LONG run

Y KsA

Y K

Y=AK

24

Moreover,

- Implies that the growth rate of capital does NOT fall as economies accumulate capital

YY

sA

25

( )K t

Y AKs s sA

K K

t t

t t

K YK Y

GROWTH RATE OF CAPITAL (AND OUTPUT) STAYSCONSTANT IN TIME

same macro fundamentals (s,A,), same growth rate, no matter what initial conditions !!

26

MAIN RESULTS:

• perpetual accumulation-driven growth: capital accumulation alone can be the “engine of economic growth”

• savings rate has long-run growth effects: an increase in the savings rate increases the growth rate of capital and output forever

27

Endogenous growth and convergence

The AK model has two interesting features:

(A) a poor economy will NOT achieve the income per capita of a rich economy even if has the same macro fundamentals

(B) holding deep parameters or macro fundamentals constant as economies become richer, growth does not slow down

are these two linked? NO!

28

tK

Ys

K

t

t

KK

Endogenous growth model where GROWTH RATE OF CAPITAL FALLS IN TIME

29

Endogenous growth and convergence

(A) a poor economy will NOT achieve the income per capita of a rich economy even if has the same macro fundamentals

(B) holding deep parameters or macro fundamentals constant as economies become richer, growth MAY STILL slow down

30

The problem with the AK model?

• Capital share too large

• Back to the Solow model?

-- externalities

-- human capital

31

3. EXTERNALITIES AND ENDOGENOUS GROWTH

In the Solow model we have• perfect competition• no externalities

As a result

which we said was around

YMPK r

K

( )" " CAPITAL INCOME SHARE

Y K r KK Y Y

13

32

Why ?

Because the RESULTS of INVESTMENT are assumed to be

– EXCLUDABLE (only the INVESTOR benefits directly)

But sometimes investments by one particular firm yields results that are

– NON-EXCLUDABLE

– NON-RIVAL

CAPITAL INCOME SHAREY KK Y

33

Rivalry and excludability

EXCLUDABLE? YES NO

YES --Banana for personal consumption --Truck for production

-- Crowded highway in Germany -- Sun light

RIVAL?

NO -- NON-crowded highway in Italy (for pay) -- PAY TV

--Car design --New form of organization for production

34

What if investment has a non-rival, non excludable element?

PRIVATE

Yr

K

(SOCIAL)ECONOMY WIDE

Yr

K

1CAPITAL INCOME SHARE=

3Y KK Y

Externalities: real world has SLOWER convergence than Solow model, but not as slow as in endogenous growth model

35

Non-excludability, non-rivalry in the Solow model?

• Technological progress!

• But fell from heaven; or to put it differently COMES WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME, not with investment

36

The Solow model with externalities

• Capital income share reflects the internal return to capital

• Elasticity of aggregate output wrt to capital reflects the social return to capital (private plus external return)

37

Solow model with externalities

1( , ) ( )f f f fF K L K EL

where f is an index for firms: f=1,…,N

E Ak

where A grows at rate a; and there are positive externalities to aggregate capital accumulation if and only if > 0

38

Solve:

• Optimal behavior of each firm (rental of capital and labor)

• Aggregate production as a function of aggregate inputs (capital and labor)

• Solow and non-Solow dynamics

39

4. HUMAN CAPITAL AND ENDOGENOUS GROWTH

In the Solow model we have

• perfect competition

• no externalities

• only ONE TYPE OF CAPITAL: PHYSICAL CAPITAL

As a result

CAPITAL INCOME SHAREY KK Y

40

But what about HUMAN CAPITAL?

What is human capital?

• knowledge in people that makes them more productive

In many ways similar to physical capital

• first INVEST (go to school; get some training) • then GET A RETURN (higher wage)

41

1CAPITAL INCOME SHARE=

3Y BroadCapital

BroadCapital Y

Human capital (like capital externalities):

• real world has SLOWER convergence than Solow model, but not as slow as in endogenous growth model

• capital and savings explains more of international differences in income than in the Solow model

42

Level and growth effects of HC

• Level effect of HC: more HC raises output (“neoclassical view of HC”)

• Growth effect: human capital may determine the rate of technological progress:

may affect growth rate in BGP

or have transitional growth effects only

43

Growth effects of HC (A)

• Lucas, JME, 1988: human capital can produce output or “technology”:

,

, " ",

,

( )c t

c t LEARNINGc t c

c t

Aa h HC

A

increasing HC allocated to learning may therefore increase the BGP growth rate(the downside is that output is reduced in the short and medium run)

44

“Growth” effects of HC (B)

Nelson and Phelps, AER, 1966

, ,,

,

( ) frontier t c tc t c

frontier t

A Aa h HC

A

, ,c t frontier ta a

,,

,

( ) 1 c tfrontier t c

frontier t

Aa h HC

A

1

( )frontierc

frontier c

aA

A h HC

BGP:

45

Empirical work on link between human capital and growth

46

The human capital “level” effect

47

48

49

50

FROM ELASTICITIES to AGGREGATE RATES OF RETURNTO SCHOOLING

Much of the aggregate work estimates:

1% increase in average years of schoolingincome per capita growth(?)

Formally:increase y

yelasticity=

increase in SS

51

Something that is easier to interpret intuitively would be:

1 YEAR increase in average years of schoolingincome per capita growth(?)

*

increase yy

Aggr. Return= Sincrease in S

S

52

Elasticity Aggr. Return

0.1 1.25%

0.2 2.5%

0.3 3.75%

0.4 5%

0.5 6.25%

0.7 8.75%

1 12%

1.2 15%

53

54

55

56

HUMAN CAPITAL QUALITY

57

58

59

60

61

62

Human capital externalitiesMoretti, AER 2004

63

Estimatingexternalities:

PLANT

INDUSTRY

CITY

-- does output IN THE PLANT(controlling for inputs in plant and industry)INCREASE with THE SHARE OF COLLEGE WORKERSoutside of INDUSTRY but inside CITY?

64

Estimating equation:

65

Data:

66

Benchmark results:

67

68

Physical capital externalities?

69

70

Human capital “growth” effect: a cautionary note

71

Goal and problems

• Is there an effect of the level of human capita at t on future growth rates?

• Literature has regressed growth on initial levels of human capital.

• ISSUES:-- Is it really the initial stock of HC? Otherwise

endogeneity problem. See Bils and Klenow AER, 2001.

-- Anything that increase the productivity of human capital will produce the correlation above!

72

HUMAN CAPITAL AND INTERNATIONAL SPECIALIZATION

73

Human Capital Accumulation Aggregate Income Growth(?)

Difficulties to test at country level:

• limited number of countries• countries with rapid HC accumulation “look good” in many other dimensions• (expected) income growth could be driving HC accumulation

74

Human Capital Accumulation Income Growth

If there is international trade, this should come about partly through shifts towards more HC-intensive sectors.

75

LOW HC Industry

HIGH HC Industry

TEST: BOTTOM CELL SHOULD BE GREATER THAN TOP CELL

LOW HC GROWTH Country

G(LOW industry, LOW GROWTH country)

G(HIGH industry, LOW GROWTH country)

G(HIGH,LOW HC GROWTH)-G(LOW,LOW HC GROWTH)

HIGH HC GROWTH Country

G(LOW industry, HIGH GROWTH country)

G(HIGH industry, HIGH GROWTH country)

G(HIGH,HIGH HC GROWTH)-G(LOW,HIGH HC GROWTH)

“HC-growth effect”

76

,1980 90

,1980( )

(Initial Industry Share, Finance, PropRights)

sc c s

s c

y

HC

Other

Estimating STRATEGY

FIRST: ESTIMATE

77

SECOND: ASK

Is the estimated elasticity greater for HUMAN CAPITALINTENSIVE INDUSTRIES?

ESTIMATEDELASTICITY

YEARS OF SCHOOLINGIN INDUSTRY (US say)

78

US average years of schooling of employees in industry

Industry SCH Industry SCH

Drugs 13.45 Pottery 11.09

Office, computing 13.40 Tobacco 11.00

Transportation equipment 12.86 Food products 10.93

Basic chemicals excl. fertilizers 12.79 Furniture 10.59

Radio 12.55Wood

Products 10.54

Printing and Publishing 12.54 Textile 10.38

Industrial chemicals 12.42 Spinning 10.21

Professional goods 12.22 Footwear 10.14

Chemicals 12.15 Apparel 10.04

Electric machinery 12.01

79

Figure: Schooling-Growth and Growth: Basic

311

313

314

321

322323324

331 332

341

342

352

353

354

355

356

361

362369

371372 381

382

383

384

385

390

3211

3411

3511

3513

3522 3825

3832

3841 3843

1011

1213

14In

dust

ry H

C In

tens

ity H

CIN

T(S

CH

)

.04 .06 .08 .1 .12Estimated Coefficient on Change in Schooling (1990-1970)

80

Figure: Schooling-Growth and Growth: With Controls

311

313

314

321

322323324

331 332

341

342

352

353

355

356

361

362369

371372 381

382

383

384

385

390

3211

3411

3511

3513

3522 3825

3832

3841 3843

1011

1213

14In

dust

ry H

C In

tens

ity H

CIN

T(S

CH

)

-.02 0 .02 .04 .06Estimated Coefficient on Change in Schooling (1990-1970)

81

IS THE EFFECT STRONGER IN OPEN ECONOMIES?

82

IS THE EFFECT THERE given income levels andgrowth?