Journal of Economic Growth

, Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 115–148 | Cite as

Industry and the Family: Two Engines of Growth

  • Michelle Connolly
  • Pietro F. Peretto

Abstract

We generalize the class of endogenous growth models in which the scale of the economy has level rather than growth effects, and study the implications of different demographic and technological factors when both fertility choice and research effort are endogenous. The model incorporates two dimensions of technological progress: vertical (quality of goods) and horizontal (variety of goods). Both dimensions contribute to productivity growth but are driven by different processes and hence respond differently to changes in fundamentals. Specifically, while unbounded vertical progress is feasible, the scale of the economy limits the variety of goods. Incorporating a linearity in reproduction generates steady-state population growth and variety expansion. We thus have two engines of growth generating dynamics that we compare with observed changes in demographics, market structure, and patterns of growth. Numerical solutions yield the important insight that, while endogenous, fertility responds very little to industrial policies. Demographic shocks, in contrast, have substantial effects on growth.

endogenous growth market structure fertility choice population growth 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aghion, P., and P. Howitt. (1998). Endogenous Growth Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  2. Becker, G. S., and R. J. Barro. (1998). “A Reformulation of the Economic Theory of Fertility,” Quarterly Journal of Economics 108, 1-25.Google Scholar
  3. Chandler, A. D. (1977). The Visible Hand: The Managerial Revolution in American Business. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
  4. Dalgaard, C.-J., and C. T. Kreiner. (2001). “Is Declining Productivity Inevitable?” Journal of Economic Growth 6, 187-203.Google Scholar
  5. Hansen, G. D., and E. C. Prescott. (2002). “Malthus to Solow,” American Economic Review 92(4), 1205-1217.Google Scholar
  6. Howitt, P. (1999). “Steady Endogenous Growth with Population and R&D Inputs Growing,” Journal of Political Economy 107, 715-730.Google Scholar
  7. Galor, O., and D. N. Weil. (2000). “Population, Technology, and Growth: From Malthusian Stagnation to the Demographic Transition and Beyond,” American Economic Review 90, 806-828.Google Scholar
  8. Jones, C. I. (2001). “Was an Industrial Revolution Inevitable? Economic Growth Over the Very Long Run,” BEP Advances in Macroeconomics 1(2).Google Scholar
  9. Kelly, M. (2001). “Linkages, Thresholds, and Development,” Journal of Economic Growth 6, 39-53.Google Scholar
  10. Kögel, T., and A. Prskawetz. (2001). “Agricultural Productivity Growth and Escape from the Malthusian Trap,” Journal of Economic Growth 6, 337-357.Google Scholar
  11. Lucas, R. E. Jr. (1998). “On the Mechanics of Economic Development,” Journal of Monetary Economics 22, 3-42.Google Scholar
  12. Lucas, R. E. Jr. (2002). Lectures on Economic Growth. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Maddison, A. (1995). Monitoring the World Economy 1820–1992. Paris: Development Centre of the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.Google Scholar
  14. Mowery, D. C., and N. Rosenberg. (1989). Technology and the Pursuit of Economic Growth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Peretto, P. F. (1998a). “Technological Change, Market Rivalry, and the Evolution of the Capitalist Engine of Growth,” Journal of Economic Growth 3, 53-80.Google Scholar
  16. Peretto, P. F. (1998b). “Technological Change and Population Growth,” Journal of Economic Growth, 3, 283-311.Google Scholar
  17. Peretto, P. F., and S. Smulders. (2002). “Technological Distance, Growth and Scale Effects,” The Economic Journal 112(481), 603-624.Google Scholar
  18. Romer, P. (1986). “Increasing Returns and Long-Run Growth,” Journal of Political Economy 94, 1002-1037.Google Scholar
  19. Romer, P. (1990). “Endogenous Technological Change,” Journal of Political Economy 98, S71-S102.Google Scholar
  20. Scherer, F. M., and D. Ross. (1990). Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  21. Segerstrom, P. S. (1998). “Endogenous Growth Without Scale Effects,” American Economic Review 88, 1290-1310.Google Scholar
  22. Segerstrom, P. S. (2000). “The Long-Run Growth Effects of R&D Subsidies,” Journal of Economic Growth 5, 277-305.Google Scholar
  23. Sutton, J. (1992). Sunk Costs and Market Structure. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  24. Young, A. (1998). “Growth Without Scale Effects,” Journal of Political Economy 106, 41-63.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michelle Connolly
    • 1
  • Pietro F. Peretto
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Economics, 305 Social SciencesDuke UniversityDurham

Personalised recommendations