 WHY DO RATES OF β‐CONVERGENCE DIFFER? A META‐REGRESSION ANALYSISStephen Dobson, Carlyn Ramlogan and Eric Strobl () Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 2006, vol. 53, issue 2, 153-173 Abstract: The roles played by differences in study design and methodology in influencing the estimates of β‐convergence have been hinted at in narrative reviews of the empirical convergence literature. While such reviews are useful, they only provide informal evidence as to the reasons for the study‐to‐study variation in reported convergence rates. In contrast, meta‐regression analysis is a way of formally measuring the roles played by study design and methodology in influencing β‐convergence. In cross‐national studies, convergence rates are found to be higher when panel estimation methods are used, and when human capital development, investment rates and spatial factors are controlled for. The longer the time span covered by the estimation, the lower the rates. In intra‐national studies, β‐convergence is higher when the investment rate is included as a conditioning variable and when GMM estimation methods are used. Rates are found to be lower in studies of developing countries. Date: 2006 Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:scotjp:v:53:y:2006:i:2:p:153-173 Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from Access Statistics for this article Scottish Journal of Political Economy is currently edited by Tim Barmby, Andrew Hughes-Hallett and Campbell Leith More articles in Scottish Journal of Political Economy from Scottish Economic Society Contact information at EDIRC. |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.