Lecture 1: Main reading:

Solow Growth Model Romer, Chapter 1

Lecture 1 Outline:
Tiago Cavalcanti1
I Growth Facts
1 University of Cambridge I Solow Growth Model
I Implications and some tests of the theory
E200: Macroeconomics
Cambridge
Michaelmas 2022

Main questions in social science Cross-Country Income Differences (PPP GDPpc, $ 2017)

1. Why are some countries so rich and others so poor?

2. Why do growth rates vary across countries and over time?

3. Why do some countries “take off” while others fall behind?

4. Can all countries have the level of development of the rich

countries?

Point: Questions similar to those raised by Adam Smith 240

years ago!

( pp95
05
)1960 = 19
Cross-Country Income Differences (PPP GDPpc, $ 2017) Cross-Country Income Differences (PPP GDPpc, $ 2017)

( pp95
05
)1960 = 19; ( pp95
05
)1980 = 39 ( pp95
05
)1960 = 19; ( pp95
05
)1980 = 39; ( pp95
05
)2000 = 46

Cross-Country Income Differences (PPP GDPpc, $ 2017) Cross-Country Income Differences (pop weighted)

( pp95
05
)1960 = 19; ( pp95
05
)1980 = 39; ( pp95
05
)2000 = 46; ( pp95
05
)2019 = 40
Cross-Country Income Differences (pop weighted) Cross-Country Income Differences (pop weighted)

Cross-Country Income Differences (pop weighted) World Income Distribution

Definitions (World Bank - 2018)
1. Low-income countries ($1,025 or less): Many African countries
fall under this category, as do countries such as North Korea,
Haiti, and Nepal.
848.7m people.

2. Lower-middle-income countries ($1,026 to $3,995): Members

include India, Nicaragua, Nigeria, and Vietnam.
2.561b people.

3. Upper-middle-income countries ($3,996 to $12,375): Members

include China, Latin American economies, such as Brazil and
Colombia, countries such as Lebanon, South Africa and Turkey.
2.409b people.

4. High income countries ($12,366 or more): US, Western and

Northern Europe, Japan, Singapore, some Middle East countries.
1.054b people.
 GDPi,00 US,00
pc /GDPpc
World Income Distribution Movement Within the Distribution, GDPi,80 US,80
pc /GDPpc

Definitions (World Bank)

1. 50% world pop (low + low middle) have 10% of world income.

2. Norway ($80,790) 163 times as rich as Democratic Republic of

Congo, 45 times as rich as Bangladesh (correcting by PPP).

i,00
ypc
US,00
ypc
i,80
ypc
: NGA=0.12; VEN=0.46; GBR=1.01; SGP=1.30; KOR=2.92
US,80
ypc

GDPi,19 US,19
pc /GDPpc
Movement Within the Distribution, GDPi,00 US,00 GDP per capita growth and population growth
pc /GDPpc

i,19
ypc
US,19
ypc
i,00
ypc
: VEN=0.02; GRC=0.85; GBR=1.01; SGP=1.62; CHN=2.69
US,00
ypc
World Economic History in one Picture - Clark (2007) Income and welfare

I Is income per capita a “sufficient statistic” for the welfare ?

1. Differences in income per capita have strong implications for

differences in standards of living: nutrition, literacy, infant
mortality, life expectancy,...
- See gapminder: http://www.gapminder.org/
I Human Development Index. Three components to the index:
1. Life expectancy at birth;
2. Education, combine mean/expected years of schooling;
3. logarithm of GNI per capita.

x xmin
Ii = ,
xmax xmin
1 1 1
HDI = ILife
3
IEduc
3
IIncome
3
.

Human Development Index HDI versus GNI per capita

I Implicit (subjective) weighting scheme.

0.9

I One way (of many) to combine Implicit development indicators. 0.8

0.7
1. 2013: US rank (HDI=5, GNI=11) differential +6
2. 2013: UK rank (HDI=14, GNI=27) differential +13
HDI

0.6

3. 2013: Kuwait rank (HDI=46, GNI=3) differential -43 0.5

4. 2013: Brazil rank (HDI=79, GNI=76) differential -3 0.4

5. 2013: China rank (HDI=91, GNI=88) differential -3

0.3

6. 2013: India rank (HDI=135, GNI=130) differential -5

0.2
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
GNI per capita (US$), 2012 4
x 10
Does everyone benefit from economic growth? Robert M. Solow (1924-...), Nobel Prize Winner, 1987

Table: Real Income Growth by Groups, 1993-2010, Saez and Piketty (2012)

Average Top 1% Bottom 99% Fraction of

Income Incomes Incomes Total Growth (or loss)
Real Growth Real Growth Real Growth Captured by the top 1%
1993-2010 13.8% 58.0% 6.4% 52%
1993-2000 31.5% 98.7% 20.3% 45%
2000-2002 -11.7% -30.8% -6.5% 57%
2002-2007 16.1% 61.8% 6.8% 65%
2007-2009 -17.4% -36.3% -11.6% 49%
2009-2010 2.3% 11.6% 0.2% 93%

The Solow Model: Basic Structure The Solow Model: Households

1. Time is continuous

2. Demographics: Initial population L0 . Population grows at a

constant rate n: 1. Population dynamics:
I Continuous time as an approximation of discrete time. Let
L̇(t) dL(t)
t = 0, 1, 2, ... and n be the growth rate, then: = n, where L̇(t) = .
L(t) dt
Lt+1 = (1 + n)Lt
L(t) = ent L(0), and normalise L(0) = 1.
I In fraction of time, we have:

Lt+ Lt
Lt+ = (1 + n)Lt ) Lt+ Lt = nLt ) = nLt 2. Households save a constant fraction of income, i.e. exogenous
savings rate s(.) = s > 0.
I Define: Ẋ = lim t!0
Xt+ t
t
Xt

L̇(t) dL(t)
= n, where L̇(t) = .
L(t) dt
The Solow Model: Capital Stock Technology I
)National income accounting

Y = C + I + G + NX. ) The production function is given by

For now, no government G = 0 and a closed economy NX = 0. Y(t) = F [K(t), L(t), t] = F [K(t), A(t)L(t)] (1)
Capital stock, K(t), depreciates at constant rate > 0:
1. Capital stock: 1. A(t) corresponds to technological progress.

K̇(t) = I(t) K(t). 2. A(t)L(t) is called “effective labour”.

Ȧ
3. A = g , A(t) = A(0)egt . Exogenous technological progress.
2. In equilibrium (closed economy): I(t) = S(t) = sY(t);
C(t) = (1 s)Y(t). Therefore,

K̇(t) = sY(t) K(t).

Technology II Firms
Production function: ⇣ ⌘
1 1 1
Y(t) = F(K(t), A(t)L(t)) = ↵K(t) + (1 ↵)(A(t)L(t))
Let’s focus on the Cobb-Douglas case. Firms maximize profits (For
" ⇣ ⌘# 1
@ log
FK
FL
the sake of space, let’s now omit the time descriptor.):
Elasticity of substitution: = @ log( K .
)
L
⇡ = max{K ↵ (AL)1 ↵
wL rK K}.
K,L
1. Cobb-Douglas: As ! 1, then
I FOCs:
Y(t) = F(K(t), A(t)L(t)) = K(t)↵ (A(t)L(t))1 ↵
. Y
w = (1 ↵)K ↵ A1 ↵
L ↵
= (1 ↵) ,
L
2. Leontief: As ! 0, then Y
rK = ↵K ↵ 1
(AL)1 ↵
=↵ .
K
Y(t) = F(K(t), A(t)L(t)) = min{↵K(t), (1 ↵)A(t)L(t)}.

3. Perfect substitutes: As ! 1, then

Y(t) = F(K(t), A(t)L(t)) = ↵K(t) + (1 ↵)A(t)L(t).

Balanced Growth Path (BGP): Long-Run Equilibrium I Balanced Growth Path: Long-Run Equilibrium II
Definition: A BGP is an equilibrium path for K, Y, C, w, and rK such Along the BGP: gK = g + n
that these variables grow at a constant rate: K̇K = gK ; ẎY = gY ;
Ċ ẇ r˙K ✓ ◆1
= gC ; = gw ; = grK . Y K ↵ (AL)1 ↵ AL ↵
C w rK
Y = K ↵ (AL)1 ↵
) = = ) gY = gK .
|{z}
K K K
K
=const
I Does a balanced growth path exist? AL

K̇ K ↵ (AL)1 ↵
C
K̇ = sK ↵ (AL)1 ↵
K, ) =s , C = (1 s)Y, ) = (1 s), ) gC = gY = gK = g + n.
K K Y
✓ ◆1 ↵
AL
gK + = s . ✓ ◆↵
K K
w = (1 ↵)K ↵ A1 ↵
L ↵
= (1 ↵)A ) gw = g.
|{z}
Along the BGP gK + is constant, therefore: = const. AL
K
AL
K
=const
Taking log of both sides and differentiating with respect to time: AL

✓ ◆1 ↵
Ȧ L̇ K̇ AL
ln(A)+ln(L) ln(K) = ln(const) ) + = 0 ) gK = g+n. rK = ↵K ↵ 1
(AL)1 ↵
=↵ ) grK = 0.
|{z}
A L K K
K
AL
=const

Stationary System Does the economy converge to the BGP equilibrium?

K̇ = sY K.
Y K
Divide both sides by AL and recall that ỹ = AL , k̃ = AL :
K
Define: k̃ = AL . Notice that
✓ ◆↵ K̇ K ↵ (AL)1 ↵ K K̇
Y K ↵ (AL)1 ↵ K =s ) = sk̃↵ k̃,
ỹ ⌘ = = = k̃↵ ⌘ f (k̃), AL AL AL AL
AL AL AL
K d K̇AL (ȦL + AL̇)K K̇ Ȧ L̇
k̃ = ) k̃ = k̃˙ = ) k̃˙ = ( + )k̃.
AL dt (AL)2 AL A L
I ỹ = Y
AL denotes output per efficient unit of labor
K̇ Ȧ L̇ K̇
= k̃˙ + ( + )k̃ ) = k̃˙ + (g + n)k̃.
I k̃ = K
denotes capital per efficient unit of labor. AL A L AL
AL

k̃˙ + (n + g)k̃ = sk̃↵ k̃ )

k̃˙ = |{z}
sk̃↵ (n + + g)k̃
| {z }
investment depreciation
Dynamics to the BGP II Dynamics to the BGP III
Observe that:

k̃˙
ỹ = f (k̃) k̃˙ = sk̃↵ (n + g + )k̃ ) k̃ = = sk̃↵ 1
(n + + g).
k̃
Then:

˙
k̃ = sf (k̃) (n + + g)k̃
k̃˙ 1 @ k̃ 2
(g + n + )k̃
k̃ = = sk̃↵ (n + + g) ) = s(1 ↵)k̃↵ < 0.
k̃ @ k̃
ỹ

s ỹ = sf (k̃) Moreover:

lim k̃ = 1 and lim k̃ = (n + + g) < 0.

k̃!0 k̃!1

The model is globally stable and there is a unique k̃⇤ (k̃˙ ⇤ = 0):
0
0
k̃(0) k̃ k̃⇤ 4
x 10  1
s 1 ↵
s(k̃⇤ )↵ = (n + g + )k̃⇤ ) k̃⇤ = .
n+g+

Dynamics to the BGP V Dynamics to the BGP VI

=
˙
k̃
= s f(k̃k̃) (n + + g)
1. If k̃ < k̃⇤ , saving/investment exceeds depreciation, thus k̃ > 0.
k̃ k̃

2. If k̃ > k̃⇤ , saving/investment lower than depreciation, thus

k̃ < 0.
k̃

3. Along the Balanced Growth Path (BGP) equilibrium,

>0
k̃ = ỹ = c̃ = 0!
k̃ k̃ ⇤ <0
k̃

k̃
Properties of the Balanced Growth Path I Properties of the Balanced Growth Path II

1. In the BGP aggregate variables grow at rate (g + n), and per

capita variables grow at the rate g
K K 2. Changes in s, n, or will affect the levels of k⇤ , y⇤ , and c⇤ but not
Proof: k̃ = AL and k = L.
the growth rates of these variables.
K = ALk̃ ) log(K) = log(A) + log(L) + log(k̃).
Differentiate with respect to time:
3. Along the BGP, GDP per worker will be higher in countries
where the rate of investment is high and where the population
K̇ Ȧ L̇ k̃˙
= + + =g+n+ k̃ = g + n. growth rate is low - but neither factors would have an impact on
K A L k̃ the long run growth rate of these variables.
Similarly:

k̇ Ȧ k̃˙
k = Ak̃ ) = + =g+ k̃ = g.
k A k̃

Golden Rule and Dynamic Inefficiency I Golden Rule and Dynamic Inefficiency II
Definition: (Golden Rule) Saving rate that maximizes consumption
in the long run (BGP).
 ↵ c̃⇤ = (1 s)f (k̃ ⇤ )
s 1 ↵
max c̃⇤ = (1 s)f (k̃⇤ ) = (1 s) ,
s n+g+
h i 1
s 1 ↵
where k̃⇤ = n+g+ and f (k̃⇤ ) = (k̃⇤ )↵ .

 ↵  ↵
1 c̃⇤
@c̃⇤ s 1 ↵ ↵ s 1 ↵ 1
= +(1 s) ,
@s n+g+ 1 ↵ n+g+ n+g+
 ↵
1
@c̃⇤ s 1 ↵ s ↵
= = 0 ) sGR = ↵.
@s n+g+ n+g+

1. If s < sGR , then increases in s would increase c̃⇤ in the long run.
0
0 sGR 1
s
2. If s > sGR , then increases in s would decrease c̃⇤ in the long run
(Economy is dynamically Inefficient)
The Solow Growth Model: Solution I Parentheses: Linear versus log scales
43
x 10 Linear Scale Log-Scale
100

˙ = sk̃(t)↵
k̃(t) ( + g + n)k̃(t).
x(t) = e xt
x(0) 99
ln(x(t)) ) dln(x(t))
dt = ẋ(t)
x(t) = x

98

97

I This is a function giving the change of k̃ as a function of the

2

96

current value of k̃.

95

I Solving the model means turning this into a function giving k̃ as 94

a function of an initial condition k̃0 and time t. 1

93

92

I The equation is an Ordinary Differential Equation (ODE). This

can not be solved analytically but can be simulated.
91

0 90

Point: Use log scales to describe variables that are growing over time.

Transition Dynamics in the Solow Growth Model Policy change: Savings rate

Suppose initially that the economy is in its BGP equilibrium, k̃1⇤ .

Recall the fundamental equation:

k̃˙ = sf (k̃) (n + g + )k̃.

1. If savings rate s increases, sf (k̃1⇤ ) > (n + g + )k̃1⇤ ) k̃˙ > 0.

2. Capital stock k̃ grows until it reaches new higher BGP.

3. Along transition, k̃ and ỹ, rises, but growth rate slows down.
(Can you show what happen with c in the transition?)

4. In new BGP, per capita variables K/L, Y/L, and C/L grow again
at rate g.
A rise in the savings rate - Dynamic Efficient Economy A rise in the savings rate - Dynamic Inneficient Economy

Conditional Convergence The Lack of Convergence for the World I (1960-2007)

1. Countries converge to steady state determined by parameters

(s, n, g, , ↵);

2. Does model predict poorer countries grow faster (absolute

convergence)?

I No! Conditional on having similar parameters (same steady

state), poorer countries predicted to grow faster (conditional
convergence)
... But Conditional Convergence (1960-2007) Speed of Convergence

I Transition speed towards steady state important.

I If rapid, we can focus on steady state,

I If slow, transitional dynamics dominant.

Speed of Convergence I Speed of Convergence II

I Equation of motion for capital: k̃˙ = sk̃↵ (n + g + )k̃.

I First-order Taylor approximation around the steady-state

I Equation of motion for capital: k̃˙ = sk̃↵ (n + g + )k̃. (g(x)|x⇤ = g(x⇤ ) + g0 (x⇤ )(x x⇤ )):

I This is a non-linear differential equation. ˙ = s(k̃⇤ )↵

k̃| (n + g + )k̃⇤ +(↵s(k̃⇤ )↵ 1
(n + g + ))(k̃ k̃⇤ ),
k̃⇤ | {z } | {z }
g(x⇤ ) g0 (x⇤ )
I Take a Taylor first-order linear approximation.
At the steady-state: k̃˙ = 0 ) s(k̃⇤ )↵ 1 = (n + g + ).

˙ =
k̃| (1 ↵)(n + g + )(k̃ k̃⇤ ).
k̃⇤
Speed of Convergence III Speed of Convergence IV
) k̃(t) = (1 e t )k̃⇤ + k̃(0)e t

˙ =
k̃| (k̃ k̃⇤ ), where = (1 ↵)(n + g + ). I Speed of convergence. Define t ⌘ thalf by:
k̃⇤

k̃⇤ k̃(0)
k̃(thalf ) k̃(0) =
2
) Particular solution: k̃˙ = 0 ) k̃P (t) = k̃⇤
thalf ) 1 1 thalf
so that: (1 e = ) =e
) Homogeneous solution: k̃˙ + k̃ = 0 ) k̃H (t) = Ce t 2 2

) General solution: k̃(t) = k̃P (t) + k̃H (t) = k̃⇤ + Ce t ln 2 0.70

thalf = ⇡
) Notice that: k̃(0) = k̃⇤ + C ) C = k̃(0) k̃⇤
t t )k̃⇤ t I If " =) thalf #, i.e. convergence is faster
) k̃(t) = k̃⇤ + (k̃(0) k̃⇤ )e = (1 e + k̃(0)e

) k̃(t) = (1 e t )k̃⇤ + k̃(0)e t I = (1 ↵)(n + g + ) does not depend on the savings rate.
(United States: ↵ = 1/3, n = 0.01, = 0.06, g = 0.02 )
= 0.0533 ) thalf = 13.125. Point: Too Fast!)

Steady-State Levels Growth Regressions: Mankiw, Romer, and Weil (1992)

↵
I On the balanced growth path: ỹ⇤ = ( s
+n+g )
1 ↵ .
Y s ↵ s ↵
y= = A( ) 1 ↵ = egt A(0)( )1 ↵ .
L +n+g +n+g
I Taking log in both sides:

↵ ↵
ln y = gt + ln A(0) + ln s ln( + n + g)
1 ↵ 1 ↵
I Mankiw, Romer and Weil (1992), assumed that g and are
common to all countries and A(0) = c0 + ✏i
↵ ↵
ln yi = c0 + ln si ln( + ni + g) + ✏i .
1 ↵ 1 ↵
I They run the following regression:

ln yi = c0 + c1 ln si c2 ln( + ni + g) + ✏i .
How well does the Solow model do? Explaining Differences in Income Levels

1. About 59% of cross country income difference can be explained I Aggregate production function:
by differences in investment rate and population growth

Yt
2. Qualitative: Predicts the correct signs for coefficients Yt = At F(Kt , Ht ) ) = yt = At F(kt , ht ) (Ht = ht Lt ).
Lt
3. Quantitative:
yt = TFPt ⇥ F(Resourcest ).
I Implied ↵ is about 0.60, which is too high.
I However, if ↵ ⇡ 1/3 then neoclassical model predicts a
relatively short transition (fast convergence). TFPt : Total Factor Productivity;
I Observed rate of convergence ⇡ 2% per year to cover half of the
Resourcest : Physical capital and human capital;
distance between k(0) and k⇤ . Requires ↵ = 0.75, which is too
high for narrowly defined physical capital.

Development Accounting
2

2
1.5

1.5
(h_j/h_US)^0.6
(k_j/k_US)^0.4

ESP
ITA
FBEL
RALUX IRL BRNKWT
CYP
JPNFIN
AUT
DNK SGP
HKG
NLD USA NOR USA NOR
1

CHE ESTNZLKOR CAN

CZE AUS
DEU
PRTMLT
GRC DEU
AUS
ISLOMN
KOR
SAU LKA
UKRALB RUS SVN
HUN
LTU ISR
SVKGRC JPN
ISLSWE
TWN NLD
BEL IRL
LBNSVN HRV GBR MAC FJI
BOL ARM
MDA
JAM BLZ ROU
KAZ
BGR
BWA CHL
MYS
BHR
PANLVA
POL
TTO
BRB MLT CYPESP
DNK
FINFRA
HKG
CHE
AUT
ITA
GBR LUX
HUN
CZE CAN
SWE
TWN TJK
PHL
KGZ
PRY JOR
MNG PER
CRI
URY
ZAF SRBARG
MEX
IRN HRV SAU SGP BRN
BHR LVA SLV CHN
SWZ ECU
MUS
COL
BRA ZWE GAB PRT MAC
ALB
SRBARGESTSVK
LTU ISR HND
GHA
ZMB
KEN
LSO
VNM
COG
CMR
THA
NAM
TUN
EGY DOM
VEN TUR KWT
TKM
SURMKD
ROU BIH
MDV
IRN NZL
TUR TGO
UGA
SENIDN
BGD
TZAPAK
IND
LAO
LBR IRQ
SYR MDV
JOR MYS GAB
RUS
MNEPOL
BHS BMU KHM
MWI
CIV MAR
MRT
BEN GTM
URY
PER CHL
VEN
MEX
KAZ
BLR NPL
RWA
CAF
SLE
BDI
CODYEM
GMBSDN
MNG
UKR
MUS
ECU
TUN BGR
BWA MLI
SWZ
BTN COL
BRA
SYR
THA
CHN DOMPAN NER
MOZ
.5

.5

CPVMDAGEOZAF GNQ TTO

BRB
NAM
MAR
PHL ARM
LKA CRI
YEM
FJI AZE
EGY

I Let the production function be represented by:

IDN
TJK
JAM
DJI
MRT
VNMPRY IRQLCA
LSO BOL
LAO
PAK
AGO
IND
HND
COG VCT
UZB
GTM BLZ
BGD
STP
SEN
COM
GHA
GNB
NPL
KGZ
ZMB
CMR
KHM
BEN
GMB
KEN
MWI
NER SDN
NGA
GIN
TZA
SLV
CIV
SLE
TCD
TGO
BFA
UGA
MDG
MLI
ETH
CAF
RWA
COD
LBR
MOZ
BDI ZWE
TKM
0

yit = Ait kit↵ (hit )1 ↵ . Then, 0 .5 1

(y_j/y_US)
1.5 2 0 .5 1
(y_j/y_US)
1.5 2

(k/k_US)^0.4 y/y_US (h/h_US)^0.6 y/y_US

✓ ◆ ✓ ◆↵ ✓ ◆1 ↵✓ ◆
yit kit hit Ait Figure: Physical capital Figure: Human capital
= .
yjt kjt hjt Ajt
2
1.5

BRN

TTO
(A_j/A_US)

BRB NOR

Ratio of y = Ratio of factors ⇥ Ratio of productivity.

IRL
USA
1

TUR GBR
SWE SGP
CHELUX
TWN
SAUCAN HKG
AUT
MDV ISR ISL DNKNLD
FRA
DEU
BEL
ITA
FIN
AUS
PAN POLNZL CYP ESP
BLZ GAB SVKGRC
HRV JPN
SDNIRQDOM
IRN
MEX
VEN RUS
ARG PRTMLT
LTU KOR
CHL EST
LVASVN
CZE
GTMCRI
ZAF ROUHUN
KAZ
BGR
EGY URYSRB
.5

SYRMUS
PER
BWA BHR
MYS
COL
BRA
ECU
TUN
INDARM ALB
IDNTHA
TJK
MAR
PAK
NAM
JAM
PRY
CHN
BOL UKR
LKAJOR
MNG
MLI
COG
YEM
KGZ
HNDMDA
FJI
SWZ
PHL
KHM
MRT
CIV
VNM
GHA
RWA
ZMB
LAO
CMR
GMB
UGA
BGD
KEN
MOZ
BEN
NPL
SLE
TZA
SEN
LSO
NER
TGO
LBR
BDI
MWI
CAF
COD
SLV
0

0 .5 1 1.5 2
(y_j/y_US)

A/A_US y/y_US

Figure: TFP
Differences in TFP Questions to Think
1. Has the world become more (un)equal?

I Policy implications (countries can be transformed by ensuring 2. Do we observe movements in the world income distribution over
they have the same ‘tech’) but... time?

I However, it is very unclear exact what At captures It is
traditionally calculated as a residual.
I It captures our ignorance about what goes into production
beyond labor and capital!
I Idiosyncratic geographic, cultural, institutional differences.
Countries being locked in one of many equilibria (some bad),
policies, etc.
3. What is the driving force of long-run economic growth?
4. Does the Solow model predict convergence of income per capita
across countries?
5. Is the empirical evidence on convergence consistent
(quantitatively and qualitatively) with the predictions of the
Solow Growth model?
6. Is the empirical evidence on income levels consistent with the
Solow Growth model?

Further Readings
I Acemoglu (2009): ‘Introduction to Modern Economic Growth’,
Chapters 1-4 (plus various interesting books on development e.g.
‘Why nations fail?’)

I Jones (2016): Handbook chapter ‘The facts of economic growth’

(his textbook on growth is also very clear)

I See also Jones’s Nobel lecture (in honor of Paul Romer) ’Ideas,
nonrivalry and endogenous growth’ (this is well beyond the
course)

I You might also be interested in the ’secular stagnation’ literature,

with an interesting collection of articles here (again, beyond
scope of this course)

I See interesting reading on UK low productivity growth here