Growth Slides Spring2018
Growth Slides Spring2018
Spring 2018
1 / 52
Readings
2 / 52
Economic Growth
3 / 52
US Real GDP per capita
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
-0.2
50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 00 05 10 15
4 / 52
Summary Stats
5 / 52
Key Question
I What accounts for this growth?
I In a mechanical sense, can only be two things:
I Growth in productivity: we produce more output given the
same inputs
I Factor accumulation: more factors of production help us
produce more stuff
I Two key factors of production on which we focus are capital
and labor
I Labor input per capita is roughly trendless – empirically not a
source of growth in per capita output
I The key factor of production over the long run is capital:
physical stuff that must itself be produced that in turn helps
us produce more stuff (e.g. machines).
I Which is it? Productivity or capital accumulation? What are
policy implications?
I What accounts for differences in standards of living across
countries? Productivity or factor accumulation?
6 / 52
Stylized Facts: Time Series
7 / 52
Stylized Facts: Cross-Section
8 / 52
Solow Model
9 / 52
Model Basics
10 / 52
Production Function
I Production function:
Yt = At F (Kt , Nt )
11 / 52
Properties of Production Function
I Both inputs necessary: F (0, Nt ) = F (Kt , 0) = 0
I Increasing in both inputs: FK (Kt , Nt ) > 0 and
F N ( K t , Nt ) > 0
I Concave in both inputs: FKK (Kt , Nt ) < 0 and
FNN (Kt , Nt ) < 0
I Constant returns to scale: F (qKt , qNt ) = qF (Kt , Nt )
I Capital and labor are paid marginal products:
wt = At FN (Kt , Nt )
Rt = At FK (Kt , Nt )
12 / 52
Consumption, Investment, Labor Supply
I Fruit can either be eaten (consumption) or re-planted in the
ground (investment), the latter of which yields another tree
(capital) with a one period delay
I Assume that a constant fraction of output is invested,
0 ≤ s ≤ 1. “Saving rate” or “investment rate”
I Means 1 − s of output is consumed
I Resource constraint:
Yt = Ct + It
Yt = At F (Kt , Nt )
Yt = Ct + It
Kt +1 = It + (1 − δ)Kt
Ct = (1 − s )Yt
It = sYt
wt = At FN (Kt , Nt )
Rt = At FK (Kt , Nt )
14 / 52
Central Equation
Kt
I Define lowercase variables as “per worker.” kt = Nt . In
per-worker terms:
15 / 52
Plot of the Central Equation of the Solow Model
𝑘𝑡+1 = 𝑘𝑡
𝑘𝑡+1
𝑘∗
𝑘∗ 𝑘𝑡
16 / 52
The Steady State
I The steady state capital stock is the value of capital at which
kt +1 = kt
I We call this k ∗
I Graphically, this is where the curve (the plot of kt +1 against
kt ) crosses the 45 degree line (a plot of kt +1 = kt )
I Via assumptions of the production function along with
auxiliary assumptions (the Inada conditions), there exists one
non-zero steady state capital stock
I The steady state is “stable” in the sense that for any initial
kt 6= 0, the capital stock will converge to this point
I “Once you get there, you sit there”
I Since capital governs everything else, all other variables go to
a steady state determined by k ∗
I Work through dynamics
17 / 52
Algebraic Example
18 / 52
Dynamic Effects of Changes in Exogenous Variables
19 / 52
Permanent Increase in A∗
𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡+1 = 𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡
𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡+1
20 / 52
Impulse Response Functions: Permanent Increase in A∗
𝑘𝑡 𝑦𝑡
𝑦1∗
𝑘1∗
𝑘0∗ 𝑦0∗
𝑡 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒
𝑡 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒
𝑐𝑡
𝑖𝑡
𝑐1∗ 𝑖1∗
𝑐0∗
𝑖0∗
𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒
𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑡
𝑡
𝑤𝑡 𝑅𝑡
𝑤1∗
𝑤0∗
𝑅0∗
𝑡 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑡 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒
21 / 52
Permanent Increase in s
𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡+1 = 𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡
𝑘𝑘𝑡𝑡+1
22 / 52
Impulse Response Functions: Permanent Increase in s
𝑘𝑡
𝑦𝑡
𝑘1∗ 𝑦1∗
𝑘0∗ 𝑦0∗
𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒
𝑡 𝑡 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒
𝑐𝑡 𝑖𝑡
𝑖1∗
𝑐1∗
𝑐0∗ 𝑖0∗
𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒
𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒
𝑡 𝑡
𝑤𝑡 𝑅𝑡
𝑤1∗
𝑤0∗ 𝑅0∗
𝑅1∗
𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒
𝑡 𝑡
23 / 52
Discussion
I Neither changes in A∗ nor s trigger sustained increases in
growth
I Each triggers faster growth for a while while the economy
accumulates more capital and transitions to a new steady state
I Aren’t we supposed to be studying growth? In the long run,
there is no growth in this model – it goes to a steady state!
I We’ll fix that. You can kind of see, however, that sustained
growth must come from increases in productivity. Why?
I No limit on how high A can get – it can just keep increasing.
Upper bound on s
I Repeated increases in s would trigger continual decline in Rt ,
inconsistent with stylized facts
I Bottom line: sustained growth must be due to productivity
growth, not factor accumulation. You can’t save your way to
more growth
I Key assumption: diminishing returns to capital
24 / 52
Golden Rule
25 / 52
Growth
26 / 52
Augmented Solow Model
I Production function is:
Yt = At F (Kt , Zt Nt )
I Zt : labor-augmenting productivity
I Zt Nt : efficiency units of labor
I Assume Zt and Nt both grow over time (initial values in
period 0 normalized to 1):
Zt = (1 + z )t
Nt = ( 1 + n ) t
I Define kbt = ZKt Nt t and similarly for other variables. Lower case
variables: per-capita. Lower case variables with “hats”: per
efficiency unit variables
I Can show that modified central equation of model is:
1 h i
kbt +1 = sAt f (kbt ) + (1 − δ)kbt .
(1 + z )(1 + n)
28 / 52
Plot of Modified Central Equation
𝑘𝑘�𝑡𝑡+1 = 𝑘𝑘�𝑡𝑡
𝑘𝑘�𝑡𝑡+1
𝑘𝑘� ∗ 1
𝑘𝑘�𝑡𝑡+1 = �𝑠𝑠𝐴𝐴𝑡𝑡 𝑓𝑓�𝑘𝑘�𝑡𝑡 � + (1 − 𝛿𝛿)𝑘𝑘�𝑡𝑡 �
(1 + 𝑧𝑧)(1 + 𝑛𝑛)
𝑘𝑘� ∗ 𝑘𝑘�𝑡𝑡
29 / 52
Steady State Growth
I Via similar arguments to earlier, there exists a steady state kb∗
at which kbt +1 = kbt . Economy converges to this point from
any non-zero initial value of kbt
I Economy converges to a steady state in which per efficiency
unit variables do not grow. What about actual and per capita
variables? If kbt +1 = kbt , then:
Kt + 1 Kt
=
Z t + 1 Nt + 1 Z t Nt
Kt + 1 Z t + 1 Nt + 1
= = (1 + z )(1 + n)
Kt Zt Nt
kt + 1 Zt + 1
= = 1+z
kt Zt
I Level of capital stock grows at approximately sum of growth
rates of Zt and Nt . Per capita capital stock grows at rate of
growth in Zt
I This growth is manifested in output and the real wage, but
not the return on capital
30 / 52
Steady State Growth and Stylized Facts
I Once in steady state, we have:
yt +1
= 1+z
yt
kt +1
= 1+z
kt
Kt + 1 Kt
=
Yt +1 Yt
w t + 1 Nt + 1 wt Nt
=
Yt +1 Yt
Rt +1 = Rt
wt +1
= 1+z
wt
32 / 52
Convergence
I Suppose two countries are otherwise identical, and hence have
the same steady state.
I But suppose that country 2 is initially endowed with less
capital – k2,t < k1,t = k ∗
𝑘𝑘𝑗𝑗,𝑡𝑡+1 = 𝑘𝑘𝑗𝑗,𝑡𝑡
𝑘𝑘𝑗𝑗,𝑡𝑡+1
𝑘𝑘 ∗
33 / 52
Catch Up
𝑦𝑦
𝑔𝑔𝑗𝑗,𝑡𝑡+𝑠𝑠 Country 2
𝑘𝑘𝑗𝑗,𝑡𝑡+𝑠𝑠
𝑦𝑦
𝑔𝑔2,𝑡𝑡
𝑘𝑘1,𝑡𝑡 = 𝑘𝑘 ∗
𝑦𝑦
𝑔𝑔1,𝑡𝑡 = 0
𝑘𝑘2,𝑡𝑡
0 𝑠𝑠 0 𝑠𝑠
34 / 52
Is There Convergence in the Data?
16
10
Y2010/Y1950
0
0 2,000 6,000 10,000 14,000
Y1950
35 / 52
Focusing on a More Select Group of Countries
14
10
Y2010/Y1950
8
2
2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 14,000
Y1950
0.8
US
0.6 Germany
UK
Japan
0.4
0.2
0
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
I WWII losers (Germany and Japan) grew faster for 20-30 years
than the winners (US and UK)
I But don’t seem to be catching up all the way to the US:
conditional convergence. Countries have different steady
states
37 / 52
Differences in s and A∗
38 / 52
Differences in s
I Suppose A∗ the same in both countries. Suppose country 1 is
y∗
US, and country 2 is Mexico: y1∗ = 4. We have:
2
α −1
s2 = 4 α s1
39 / 52
What Could It Be?
I If countries have different steady states and differences in s
cannot plausibly account for this, must be differences in
productivity
I Seems to be backed up in data: rich countries are highly
productive
160,000
Correlation between TFP and GDP = 0.82
140,000
GDP per worker (2011 US Dollars)
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6
TFP (relative to US = 1)
40 / 52
Productivity is King
41 / 52
Factors Influencing Productivity
42 / 52
Policy Implications
43 / 52
Output Per Worker over Time
11.6
Actual Series
Trend Series
11.4
11.2
log(RGDP per Worker)
11
10.8
10.6
10.4
10.2
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Year
go back
44 / 52
Capital Per Worker over Time
12.6
Actual Series
Trend Series
12.4
12.2
log(Capital per Worker)
12
11.8
11.6
11.4
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Year
go back
45 / 52
Capital to Output Ratio over Time
3.5
3.4
3.3
K/Y
3.2
3.1
2.9
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Year
go back
46 / 52
Labor Share over Time
0.68
0.67
0.66
Labors Share
0.65
0.64
0.63
0.62
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Year
go back
47 / 52
Return on Capital over Time
0.125
0.12
0.115
Return on Capital
0.11
0.105
0.1
0.095
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Year
go back
48 / 52
Real Wage over Time
3.6
Actual Series
Trend Series
3.4
3.2
3
log(Wages)
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Year
go back
49 / 52
Income Differences
go back
50 / 52
Growth Miracles and Disasters
Growth Miracles
1970 Income 2011 Income % change
South Korea $1918 $27,870 1353
Taiwan $4,484 $33,187 640
China $1,107 $8,851 700
Botswana $721 $14,787 1951
Growth Disasters
Madagascar $1,321 $937 -29
Niger $1,304 $651 -50
Burundi $712 $612 -14
Central African Republic $1,148 $762 -34
go back
51 / 52
Education and Income Per Capita
11 10
log(RGDP per Person)
8 7
69
go back
52 / 52