Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Re-Examining Vicious Circles of Development: A Panel Var Approach

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Using panel data from 102 countries in 1975–2010, this paper explores the dynamic interaction among health, education and growth by applying panel VAR techniques. Empirical findings reveal that the predictive pattern among health, education and economic growth is not stable in the cross section of countries. While health has positive contribution to growth for all countries, education has benefited only higher middle income and high-income OECD countries. Economic growth has predictive power for the components of human development in the high-income OECD countries. Further, econometric evidence reveals that bi-directional relationship between health and education should be supported to reap the benefits of human development on economic growth.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Suri et al. (2011), both theoretically and empirically, put forward a strong connection between human development and economic growth, provide an evidence for a systematic link between them, and analyze the priorities in building up policy implications. Their findings display that, without an improvement in human development indicators, sustained economic growth is not achievable, and policies to improve human development must complement economic growth oriented policies.

  2. Recently, three way causality between health, education and economic growth have been examined for different countries and time spans by using different proxies for health and education, such as Dahal (2016) for Nepal, Şen et al. (2015) for eight developing countries, Saksena and Deb (2016) for Indian States and Bleakley et al. (2013) for US. Yet, none of them has focused on relationship among health, education and economic growth for 102 countries between 1975 and 2010 by adopting panel VAR approach based on system GMM estimates.

  3. There are a number of causality studies for some countries based on time series techniques. See, for example, Ahmad and French (2011) for Bangladesh; De Meulemeester and Rochat (1995) for Sweden, Australia, UK, France, Japan and Italy; Ljungberg and Nilson (2009) for Sweden; Asterau and Agiomirgianakis (2001) for Greece; and Selfa and Grabowski (2003) for Japan.

  4. Based on the values of their GNI per capita, the World Bank classifies countries into four categories, namely, low-income, lower middle-income, higher middle-income and higher-income. See “Appendix 1” for the classification and the list of the countries.

  5. Even though health expenditure is the widely-used proxy in the literature, this variable is not available for all countries in the period considered.

  6. For the sensitivity of the results, all regressions are carried out by benefiting from different measures of health and education. To proxy for health and education, under five mortality rates and the percentage of population who have completed secondary education have been employed, respectively. But there is no significant change in the results. All calculations are available upon request.

  7. Due to the lack of space, the panel unit root tests are not reported, but they are available upon request.

  8. The robust regression procedure is implemented by STATA via the rreg command.

  9. Using different lag orders do not generate significant changes in the results. All calculations are available upon request.

  10. All system GMM estimates are carried out by the Roodman`s `xtabond2` command in STATA (v.12). The basic weakness in the system GMM estimation is the use of too many instruments leading to misspecification of the model. In this context, to get valid instruments, we have followed the way suggested by Roodman (2006, 2009). First, a high p value of Hansen test is preferred rather than the conventional level of 0.05. Second, the “collapse” option available in STATA v.12 is used to limit the proliferation of instruments.

  11. Due to the heteroscedasticity problem in the one-step model, robust-to-heteroscedasticity variance–covariance estimator is used as (such the Sargan test statistics cannot be presented).

References

  • Ahmad, N., & French, J. J. (2011). Decomposing the relationship between human capital and GDP: An empirical analysis of Bangladesh. The Journal of Developing Areas, 44, 127–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arellano, M., & Bond, S. R. (1991). Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Review of Economic Studies, 58, 277–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arellano, M., & Bover, O. (1995). Another look at the instrumental variables estimation of error-components models. Journal of Econometrics, 68, 29–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arendt, J. N. (2005). Does Education cause better health? A panel data analysis using school reform for identification. Economics of Education Review, 24, 149–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asteriou, D., & Agiomirgianakis, G. M. (2001). Human capital and economic growth time series evidence from Greece. Journal of Policy Modeling, 23, 481–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baldacci, E., Clements, B., Gupta, S., & Cui, Q. (2008). Social spending, human capital, and growth in developing countries. World Development, 36(8), 1317–1341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barro, R. (1996). Health, human capital and economic growth. Paper for the Program on Public Policy and Health, Pan American Health Organization and World Health Organization. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization.

  • Barro, R., & Lee, J. W. (2013). A new data set of educational attainment in the world, 1950–2010. Journal of Development Economics, 104, 184–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barro, R., & Sala-i-Martin, X. (1995). Economic growth. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bills, M., & Klenow, P. J. (2000). Does schooling cause growth? American Economic Review, 90(5), 1184–1208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bleakley, H., Costa, D., & Lleras-Muney, A. (2013). Health, Education and Income in the United States, 1820–2000 (p. w19162). Washington: National Bureau of Economic Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blundell, R., & Bond, S. (1998). Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics, 87, 115–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colantonio, E., Marianacci, R., & Mattoscio, N. (2010). On human capital and economic development: Some results for Africa. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 266–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahal, G. (2016). The triangular causality among education, health and economic growth: A time series analysis of Nepal. In Proceedings of International Academic Conferences (No. 3606364). International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.

  • De Meulemeester, J. L., & Rochat, D. (1995). A causality analysis of the link between higher education and development. Economics of Education Review, 14, 351–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eide, R. E., & Showalter, M. H. (2011). Estimating the relation between health and education: What do we know and what do we need to know? Economics of Education Review, 30, 778–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gyimah-Brempong, K., & Wilson, M. (2004). Health human capital and economic growth in Sub-Saharan African and OECD countries. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 44(2), 296–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanushek, E. A., & Kim, D. (1995). Schooling, labor force quality, and economic growth. National bureau of economic research, Washington. NBERW5399.

  • Hartwig, J. (2010). Is health capital formation good for long-term economic growth? Panel Granger-causality evidence for OECD countries. Journal of Macroeconomics, 32(1), 314–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holtz-Eakin, D., Newey, W., & Rosen, H. S. (1988). Estimating vector autoregressions with panel data. Econometrica, 56, 1371–1395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsiao, F. S. T., & Hsiao, M. C. W. (2006). FDI, exports, and GDP in East and Southeast Asia: Panel data versus time-series causality analyses. Journal of Asian Economics, 17, 1082–1106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jayachandran, S., & Lleras-Muney, A. (2009). Life expectancy and human capital investments: Evidence from maternal mortality declines in Sri Lanka. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124(1), 349–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalemli-Ozcan, S., Ryder, H. E., & Weil, D. N. (2000). Mortality decline, human capital investment and economic growth. Journal of Development Economics, 62, 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenkel, D. S. (1991). Health behavior, health knowledge, and schooling. Journal of Political Economy, 99(2), 287–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kónya, L. (2006). Exports and growth: Granger-causality analysis on OECD countries with a panel data approach. Economic Modelling, 23, 978–992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, H., & Liang, H. (2010). Health, education, and economic growth in East Asia. Journal of Chinese Economic and Foreign Trade Studies, 3(2), 110–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ljungberg, J., & Nilsson, A. (2009). Human Capital and Economic Growth: Sweden 1870–2000. Cliometrica, 3(1), 71–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mankiw, N. G., Romer, D., & Weil, D. N. (1992). A contribution to the empirics of economic growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107, 407–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miguel, E., & Kremer, M. (2004). Worms: Identifying impacts on education and health in the presence of treatment externalities. Econometrica, 72(1), 159–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD (Ed.). (1998). Returns to investment in human capital. In Chapter 4 in Human capital investment: An international comparison. Paris: OECD, Centre for Educational Research and Innovation.

  • OECD. (2010). Social capital, human capital and health: What is evidence?. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Podrecca, E., & Carmeci, G. (2001). Fixed investment and economic growth: New results on causality. Applied Economics, 33, 177–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan, R. P., Arvin, M. B., Norman, N. R., & Bele, S. K. (2014). Economic growth and the development of telecommunications infrastructure in the G-20 countries: A panel-VAR approach. Telecommunications Policy. doi:10.1016/j.telpol.2014.03.001i.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pritchett, L. (2001). Where has all the education gone? World Bank Economic Review, 15(3), 367–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ranis, G., Stewart, F., & Ramirez, A. (2000). Economic growth and human development. World Development, 28(2), 197–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roodman, D. (2006). How to do xtabond2: An introduction to ‘difference’ and ‘system’ GMM in Stata. Center for Global Development Working Paper No. 103.

  • Roodman, D. (2009). How to do xtabond2: An introduction to difference and system GMM in Stata. The Stata Journal, 9(1), 86–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saksena, S., & Deb, M. (2016). Economic Growth and Human Development in Indian States after two decades of Economic Reforms. MPRA Working Paper No. 71128.

  • Schultz, T. P. (1999). Health and schooling investments in Africa. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 13(3), 67–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selfa, S., & Grabowskib, R. (2003). Education and long-run development in Japan. Journal of Asian Economics, 14, 565–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Şen, H., Kaya, A., & Alpaslan, B. (2015). Education, health, and economic growth nexus: A bootstrap panel granger causality analysis for developing countries. The University of Manchester, Discussion Paper Series EDP-1502.

  • Silles, M. A. (2009). The causal effect of education on health: Evidence from the United Kingdom. Economics of Education Review, 28(1), 122–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suri, T., Boozer, M., Ranis, G., & Stewart, F. (2011). Paths to success: The relationship between human development and economic growth. World Development, 39(4), 506–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Temple, J. (1999). The new growth evidence. Journal of Economic Literature, 37(1), 112–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windmeijer, F. (2005). A finite sample correction for the variance of linear two-step GMM estimators. Journal of Econometrics, 126, 25–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Bank (1993). World Development Report 1993: Investing in health. The World Bank, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

  • World Bank. (2013). World Development Indicators Database. Washington: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bahar Bayraktar-Sağlam Bayraktar-Sağlam.

Appendices

Appendix 1

See Table 7.

Table 7 List of countries

Appendix 2

See Tables 8, 9, 10 and 11.

Table 8 Low income countries
Table 9 Lower middle income countries
Table 10 Higher middle income countries
Table 11 High income OECD countries

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bayraktar-Sağlam, B.BS. Re-Examining Vicious Circles of Development: A Panel Var Approach. Soc Indic Res 137, 231–256 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-017-1594-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-017-1594-4

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation