Can Traditional Theories of Structural Change Fit The Data?
Francisco J. Buera and Joseph P. Kaboski Journal of the European Economic Association, 2009, vol. 7, issue 2-3, pages 469-477 Abstract: Two traditional explanations for structural changes are sector-biased technological progress and non-homothetic preferences. This paper integrates both into an otherwise standard growth model and quantitatively evaluates them vis-a-vis time series. The exercise identifies a set of puzzles for standard theories: (i) the model cannot account for the steep decline in manufacturing and rise in services in the later data; (ii) the standard model requires implausibly low elasticity of substitution across goods to match the consumption and output data; and (iii) the behavior of consumption and output shares differs significantly from that of employment shares. We argue that models that incorporate home production, sector-specific factor distortions, and differences across sectors in the accumulation of human capital are promising avenues to amend the standard
Related Questions
- How does the PSI fit in with international efforts, such as the Protein Data Bank and the International Structural Genomics Organization?
- What traditional framed buildings on the structural advantages of a separate Panelized Construction?
- Can a voice/data IP network be as reliable as traditional circuit-switched voice networks?
