Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2 Growth PDF
2 Growth PDF
Spring 2013
• Often we’ll look at a special case: Cobb-Douglas production function with labour-augmenting
technology
F (K, L) = K α (AL)1−α
F (K, L) = AK α L1−α
1
ECON 52, Winter 2012 1 THE SOLOW GROWTH MODEL
St = sYt
Ct = (1 − s) Yt
It = St
At = (1 + g) At−1
Yt 1
yt ≡ = F (Kt , Lt )
Lt Lt
Kt
=F ,1
Lt
≡ f (kt )
Kt
where kt ≡ Lt
workforce
• Note that we use “per-capita” and “per-worker” interchangeably, but population
can vary over
time and across countries
Kt+1 = (1 − δ) Kt + It
= (1 − δ) Kt + sYt
∆Kt+1 = −δKt + sYt
2
ECON 52, Winter 2012 1 THE SOLOW GROWTH MODEL
• In per-capita terms
∆kt+1 ≡ kt+1 − kt
(1 − δ) Kt + sYt
= − kt
Lt+1
(1 − δ) Kt + sYt Lt
= − kt
Lt Lt+1
1
= [(1 − δ) kt + syt ] − kt
1+n
syt − (δ + n) kt
=
1+n
sf (kt ) − (δ + n) kt
=
1+n
• Interpretation
• Examples:
• Production function is
Yt = Ktα Lt1−α
Ktα L1−α
t
yt =
Lt
= ktα
3
ECON 52, Winter 2012 1 THE SOLOW GROWTH MODEL
ss : ∆kt+1 = 0
so
α
skss − (δ + n) kss = 0
s 1−α
= kss
δ+n
1
1−α
s
kss =
δ+n
and α
1−α
s
yss =
δ+n
so we get an expression for steady state GDP per capita in terms of parameters
Answer According to one possible criterion known as the Golden Rule, society should have the
“Golden Rule” savings rate. If this sounds a bit tautological it’s because it is. It becomes more
concrete once we describe what the Golden Rule criterion is.
What do we mean by “should”? There are different possible criteria one could use to define
what should be done. The Golden Rule criterion is a very loose interpretation of the moral principle
“one should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself”. Applied to the question of the
savings rate, it can be thought to mean that societies should save in such a way as to maximize
the level of consumption in the steady state. Whether this is a good interpretation of the moral
principle is more of a literary question than an economic one, but let’s accept it for now. One
justification for this objective is that if you were going to be born into a society that is and will
remain in steady state, the Golden Rule society will be the one where you achieve the highest
utility.
css = (1 − s) yss
4
ECON 52, Winter 2012 1 THE SOLOW GROWTH MODEL
• Indirectly: the more you save, the higher the steady state capital stock, the higher the output
out of which you can consume
Here we can see the indirect effect: Higher s means higher yss . Therefore steady state consumption
is
α
1−α
s
css (s) = (1 − s)
δ+n
General Case Beyond the Cobb-Douglas case, a more general optimality condition for the
Golden-Rule-optimal savings rate comes from the following reasoning.
FOC:
∂kss (s)
−f (kss ) + (1 − s) f 0 (kss (s)) · =0 (2)
∂s
Now use the steady state condition:
5
ECON 52, Winter 2012 1 THE SOLOW GROWTH MODEL
∂kss
to compute ∂s
:
Let’s go over what this means because it’s not (just) a bunch of maths. We start from equation (1),
which says how much we consume in steady state. This depends on the savings rate directly and
indirectly through the effect of s on kss . We then take first order conditions to find an optimum
and come up with (2). This says that the direct effect, which is negative, is just proportional to
output: the higher the output level, the more we reduce consumption when we increase savings
rates. The indirect effect depends on
1. how much output would increase if we increase the capital stock (that’s why f 0 (kss (s))
appears in the expression)
∂kss (s)
2. how much more capital we would have if we saved more (that’s why ∂s
appears in the
expression)
3. how much of the extra output would we in fact be consuming (that’s why 1 − s appears in
the expression)
This is not the end of it, because we still don’t know how much more capital we are going to have
if we increase the savings rate: we just have the expression ∂k∂sss (s)
and we need to solve for that.
That’s where we use the fact that in steady state sf (kss ) = (δ + n) kss and take derivatives on
both sides to get to (4). We then replace this in the first order conditions and get to (5).
Interpretation of the first order condition Equation (5) has a neat interpretation. Suppose
a society raised its level of savings in such a way that the steady state capital stock were higher.
Would that society have higher consumption? The answer depends on comparing f 0 (kss ) against
δ + n. Why? In a steady state, an economy will be saving/investing just enough to make up
for depreciation and population growth. That is what makes a steady state steady! In order to
6
ECON 52, Winter 2012 1 THE SOLOW GROWTH MODEL
increase the steady state capital stock by a little bit (call this ∆k) , the economy would have to
increase the absolute amount of investment by just enough to make up for the depreciation and
population growth for this extra capital, every period, i.e. invest an extra (δ + n) ∆k. How much
extra output would society get out of this extra capital? f 0 (kss ) · ∆k. When is it the case that
this extra output is enough to cover the required extra investment and have a little extra left over
to consume? Whenever
f 0 (kss ) ∆k > (δ + n) ∆k
⇔ f 0 (kss ) > δ + n
Therefore it makes sense, according to the Golden Rule, to increase s (and therefore kss ) if and
only if
f 0 (kss ) > δ + n
• For the Cobb-Douglas case: compute the marginal product of capital in a steady state
f 0 (kss ) = αkss
α−1
α−1
1−α
s
=α
δ+n
δ+n
=α
s
MP K > δ + n
⇔s<α
Markets
• So far, “engineering” approach
• Now suppose there is a market for labour and for capital services
• Questions:
7
ECON 52, Winter 2012 1 THE SOLOW GROWTH MODEL
• Firms:
max F (Ki , Li ) − wLi − rK Ki
Ki ,Li
FOC:
FK (Ki , Li ) − rK = 0
FL (Ki , Li ) − w = 0
• Graphical illustration
αKiα−1 Li1−α = rK
(1 − α) Kiα L−α
i =w
• Taking a ratio
1 − α Ki w
= K
α Li r
Ki w α
= K (6)
Li r 1−α
• If workers are expensive relative to capital, firms use more capital per worker (and vice-versa)
• (6) implies that they all must have a capital-labour ratio that equals that aggregate, i.e.
Ki K
=
Li L
8
ECON 52, Winter 2012 1 THE SOLOW GROWTH MODEL
wL = (1 − α) K α L−α · L = (1 − α) K α L1−α = (1 − α) Y
• Interest rates:
1 + rt+1
– If you build capital and rent it out, tomorrow you get the rental rate plus your depre-
ciated capital
K
(1 − δ) + rt+1
– Indifference requires
K
1 + rt+1 = 1 − δ + rt+1
K
rt+1 = rt+1 −δ
= FK − δ
rt+1 = FK − δ
9
ECON 52, Winter 2012 1 THE SOLOW GROWTH MODEL
Technological progress
• “Steady state”: no tech progress ⇒ no growth
Yt
ỹt ≡
L̃t
K α (At Lt )1−α
= t
At Lt
α 1−α
Kt At Lt
=
At Lt At Lt
α
Kt
=
At Lt
≡ k̃tα ≡ f k̃t
• Rate of “capital-per-efficiency unit of labour” accumulation computed the same way as “cap-
10
ECON 52, Winter 2012 1 THE SOLOW GROWTH MODEL
and α
1−α
s
ỹss =
δ+n+g
• Since everything is constant “per efficiency unit”, everything grows at the same rate: “balanced
growth”
– α, δ, s, n, g
– How do we know this? According to model, this will be the rate of growth of GDP per
capita when we have balanced growth
11
ECON 52, Winter 2012 1 THE SOLOW GROWTH MODEL
• Depreciation: δ ≈ 0.06
– This is hard to measure, because it’s different for different kinds of capital. BEA uses
– Buildings δ ≈ 0.02
– Equipment δ ≈ 0.15
– Computers δ ≈ 0.3
K s
= ≈ 2.22
Y δ+n+g
r = FK − δ
Compute FK :
FK = αK α−1 (AL)1−α
α−1
K
=α
AL
Y
=α
K
so
Y
r=α −δ
K
δ+n+g
=α − δ ≈ 9.8%
s
– Mismeasurement?
– Role of risk?
Growth Accounting
• How much growth do we attribute to technological progress, capital accumulation and pop-
ulation growth?
12
ECON 52, Winter 2012 2 EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE ON GROWTH
• Notation:
dXt
Ẋt ≡
dt
• Divide by Yt to express in percentage terms:
Ẏt YKt YL YA
gY ≡ = K̇t + t L̇t + t Ȧt
Yt Yt Yt Yt
YKt Kt K̇t YLt Lt L̇t YAt At Ȧt
= + +
Yt Kt Yt L t Yt At
(assume Cobb-Douglas production function)
= αgK + (1 − α) gL + (1 − α) gA
= capital share × % growth of capital
+ labour share × % growth of labour force
+ Solow residual
• Growth of Singapore and Hong Kong (table from Williamson textbook page 231)
Convergence
• Compute the growth rate of GDP-per-efficiency-unit of labour (see exercise)
gỹ = αgk̃
13
ECON 52, Winter 2012 2 EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE ON GROWTH
f (k̃t )
s k̃t
− (δ + n + g)
gk̃ =
1+n+g
• Replacing:
f (k̃t )
s k̃t
− (δ + n + g)
gỹ = α
1+n+g
• Replacing
α−1
sỹ α − (δ + n + g)
gỹ = α
1+n+g
• If we assume technology is the same in all countries, countries with lower GDP-per-capita
should grow faster!
• By how much? We want to say something like “if country A is x% poorer than country B, it
should grow z% faster”
14
ECON 52, Winter 2012 2 EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE ON GROWTH
α h α−1 i
gỹ = sỹ α − (δ + n + g)
1+n+g
α α−1
= s exp log ỹ − (δ + n + g)
1+n+g α
∂gỹ α α−1 α−1
= s exp log ỹ
∂ log ỹ 1+n+g α α
α−1 α−1
= sỹ α
1+n+g
so replacing in (7):
α−1
gỹ ≈ (δ + n + g) [log ỹ − log ỹss ]
1+n+g
• This formula tells us how much growth varies when a country is away from steady state
• By extension, also how much growth varies across different countries at different distances
to steady state.
α−1
(δ + n + g) ≈ −5.7%
1+n+g
• Countries should converge approximately 5.7% of the way to steady state every year
Evidence on Convergence
• If we plot growth rates against log(GDP per capita), we should find a slope of that magnitude
• Convergence graphs
15
ECON 52, Winter 2012 2 EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE ON GROWTH
Direct measurement
• Measure the capital stock for each country
• (see graph)
• Prediction is far off and in a systematic way: based on their capital levels alone, poor countries
should not be so poor
• Ask instead:
y = kα
α
yA kA
=
yB kB
α1
yA kA
=
yB kB
16
ECON
3 52,
WHATWinter
DOES
2012TFP DEPEND ON? WHERE DOES GROWTH IN TFP COME FROM?
• See chart
r = FK − δ
= αk α−1 − δ
Y
=α −δ
K
Y
≈ 2.22
K
α ≈ 0.35
δ ≈ 0.06
⇒ r ≈ 9.8%
Y
• Replacing the implied K
levels of other countries (see chart)
Conclusion
• Differences in capital levels are not the full explanation of differences in GDP across countries
• Policy implications:
17
ECON
3 52,
WHATWinter
DOES
2012TFP DEPEND ON? WHERE DOES GROWTH IN TFP COME FROM?
• Data on wages by education levels to see how much “human capital” you get per year
of education
• Data on education levels across countries to see how much total human capital different
countries have
• Data: education differences matter, physical capital accumulation matters but a large
chunk is “unexplained” (see graph)
5. Geography: Landlocked and tropical poorer that coastal and temperate (see graph)
• Sachs (2001) proposes explanations. See also Diamond (1997): Guns, Germs and Steel.
6. Political/social institutions
• Strong correlation between GDP and measures of political transparency, respect for
property rights, rule of law, social trust, etc.
• See graph
• Causality?
• Weaker evidence on more detailed policies
7. Misallocation
18
ECON
3 52,
WHATWinter
DOES
2012TFP DEPEND ON? WHERE DOES GROWTH IN TFP COME FROM?
19