The Productivity Convergence Debate: A Theoretical and Methodological Reconsideration

Bruce Elmslie and William Milberg

Cambridge Journal of Economics, 1996, vol. 20, issue 2, 153-82

Abstract: Two fundamental issues which have been ignored in the convergence debate are addressed in this paper. First, there has been little attention paid to the development of a general model which is able to explain convergence or divergence. Second, in the rush to put data to a convergence hypothesis, researchers have failed to consider certain methodological procedures with respect to the treatment of capital. To remedy this problem we use an input-output approach to measure catch-up. To address the theoretical lacunae we present case studies of Portugal and Japan, two countries which by 1959 had attained the threshold level of development required to join the 'convergence club', but which, for various historical (path-dependent) reasons, have diverged rapidly from each other in the period since the late 1950s. (c) 1996 Academic Press Limited Copyright 1996 by Oxford University Press.

Date: 1996
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:cambje:v:20:y:1996:i:2:p:153-82

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://academic.oup.com/journals

Access Statistics for this article

Cambridge Journal of Economics is currently edited by Jacqui Lagrue

More articles in Cambridge Journal of Economics from Cambridge Political Economy Society Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().