A Short Review of Development Thinking and Experiences

2013-11-17 18:37:49

  The process of sustainable per capita income increase and economic

  growth, characterized by continuous technological innovation and industrial

  upgrading, is a modern phenomenon. From Adam Smith to the early

  twentieth century, most economists believed that laissez-faire was the best

  vehicle for achieving sustainable growth in an economy. It was assumed

  that in thriving economies all decisions about resource allocation are made

  by economic agents interacting in markets free of government intervention.

  The price system determines not only what is produced and how but

  also for whom. Households and fi rms pursuing their own interests would

  be led, “as if by an invisible hand,” to do things that are in the interests

  of others and of society as a whole. Although the laissez-faire approach

  was challenged by Marxist economists and others, it became the dominant

  intellectual framework for the study of growth in all countries and

  remained so for a long time. It certainly provided many good insights on

  the process of economic development but it missed the importance of the

  process of continuous, fundamental technological changes and industrial

  upgrading, which distinguishes modern economic growth from premodern

  economic growth (Kuznets 1966).

  The study of economic development proceeds in two related but separate

  tracks: growth theories and development theories. While some of

  the key ingredients of modern growth theory such as competitive behavior,

  equilibrium dynamics, the importance of physical capital and human

  capital, the possibility of diminishing returns, and the impact of technological

  progress can be found in the work of classical economists (Ramsey

  1928; Schumpeter 1934), systematic modeling only started in the 1940s

  when some pioneers used primary factors to build generic models based on

  aggregate production functions. Harrod (1939) and Domar (1946) triggered

  extensive research along these lines. Following their initial work,

  the Solow-Swan model sparked the fi rst major wave of systematic growth

  analysis. The objective was to understand the mechanics of growth, identify

  its determinants, and develop techniques of growth accounting, which

  would help explain changes in the momentum and role of economic policy.

  That fi rst generation of growth researchers highlighted the centrality of

  capital. One important prediction from these models was the idea of conditional

  convergence, derived from the assumption of diminishing returns

  to capital—poor economies with lower capital per worker (relative to their

  long-run or steady-state capital per worker) will grow faster. While that

  assumption allowed the model to maintain its key prediction of conditional

  convergence, it also seemed odd: technology, the main determinant of longrun

  growth, was kept outside of the model (Lin and Monga 2010).

  A new wave of growth modeling had to come up with a convincing

  theory of technological change. Endogenous growth theory, as it came to

  be known, maintained the assumption of nonrivalry because technology is

  indeed a very different type of factor from capital and labor—it can be used

  indefi nitely by others, at zero marginal cost (Romer 1987, 1990; Aghion

  and Howitt 1992). But it was important to take the next logical step and

  to understand better the public good characterization of technology and

  think of it as a partially excludable nonrival good. The new wave therefore

  reclassifi ed technology not just as a public good but as a good that is

  subject to a certain level of private control. However, making it a partially

  excludable nonrival good and therefore giving it some degree of excludability

  or appropriability was not suffi cient to ensure that incentives for

  its production and use were socially optimal. The move away from perfect

  competition was therefore necessary. It has yielded high methodological

  payoffs. While neoclassical models of growth took technology and factor

  accumulation as exogenous, endogenous growth models explain why technology

  grows over time through new ideas and provide the microeconomic

  underpinnings for models of the technological frontier.

本文摘自《新結構經濟學》


   Economic development is a process of continuous technological innovation and structural transformation. Development thinking is inherently tied to the quest for sustainable growth strategies. This book provides a neoclassical approach for studying the determinants of economic structure and its transformation and draws new insights for development policy. The market is the basic mechanism for effective resource allocation at each level of development. However, economic development as a dynamic process entails structural changes, including industrial upgrading and diversification and corresponding improvements in hard and soft infrastructure. Such upgrading and improvements require coordination and go hand in hand with large externalities to firms transaction costs and returns to capital investment. Thus, in addition to an effective market mechanism, the government should play an active role in facilitating structural changes. The book provides empirical evidence in support of this framework as well as concrete advice to development practitioners.

 承諾與聲明

兄弟財經是全球歷史最悠久,信譽最好的外匯返佣代理。多年來兄弟財經兢兢業業,穩定發展,獲得了全球各地投資者的青睞與信任。歷經十餘年的積澱,打造了我們在業內良好的品牌信譽。

本文所含內容及觀點僅為一般信息,並無任何意圖被視為買賣任何貨幣或差價合約的建議或請求。文中所含內容及觀點均可能在不被通知的情況下更改。本文並未考 慮任何特定用戶的特定投資目標、財務狀況和需求。任何引用歷史價格波動或價位水平的信息均基於我們的分析,並不表示或證明此類波動或價位水平有可能在未來 重新發生。本文所載信息之來源雖被認為可靠,但作者不保證它的準確性和完整性,同時作者也不對任何可能因參考本文內容及觀點而產生的任何直接或間接的損失承擔責任。

外匯和其他產品保證金交易存在高風險,不適合所有投資者。虧損可能超出您的帳戶註資。增大槓桿意味著增加風險。在決定交易外匯之前,您需仔細考慮您的財務目標、經驗水平和風險承受能力。文中所含任何意見、新聞、研究、分析、報價或其他信息等都僅 作與本文所含主題相關的一般類信息.

同時, 兄弟財經不提供任何投資、法律或稅務的建議。您需向合適的顧問徵詢所有關於投資、法律或稅務方面的事宜。