Skip to main content

Endogenous Saving, Interregional Capital Mobility, and Convergence across China

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 832 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter contains an empirical study of output growth and convergence across the Chinese regions. The study is based on the Ramsey growth model and is motivated by two basic facts. One fact is that the Solow growth model, which was applied in earlier chapters, has the shortcoming of not considering the saving behavior as endogenously determined inside the economy. The other fact is that the Solow model assumes closed economies and therefore does not allow for capital mobility across the borders of economies. Dealing with the issues of endogenously determined saving rates and interregional capital mobility within a unified theoretical framework, we build our empirical models. Our regression results show the existence of a faster speed of convergence among the Chinese provinces over the period 1981–2005—faster than the Solow model predicts. Nevertheless, this finding accords with the basic prediction of the Ramsey model, especially when the model is modified to allow for capital mobility.

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The optimizing behavior of the firms can be incorporated into the decisions of the optimizing households. In other words, the model can be as well developed in alternative environments. The separation of functions between households and firms is not central to the analysis.

  2. 2.

    See, for example, Barro and Sala-i-Martin (1995), or Romer (2006), for a detailed description of the model.

  3. 3.

    The reason why we have the requirement ρ − n − (1 − θ)g > 0 is that it ensures the lifetime utility does not diverge. If this condition does not hold, the household can attain infinite lifetime utility and its maximization problem does not have a well-defined solution.

  4. 4.

    See, for example, Barro and Sala-i-Martin (1995), or Romer (2006), for a detailed derivation of the two equations.

  5. 5.

    Appendix 2A of Barro and Sala-i-Martin (1995) gives a detailed derivation of Eq. 7.11. Chapter 2 of Romer (2006), by using a clever and much easier method, obtains essentially the same equation.

  6. 6.

    A dot over a variable represents its time derivative. Recall the firms’ profits are zero and thus do not appear in the equation. Equation 7.18 assumes physical capital and human capital depreciates at the same rate δ. It is also assumed that none of the taxes collected are remitted to households, though the results would not change if these revenues showed up as lump-sum transfers or as government services that did not affect productivity or interact with choices of consumption. See Barro, Mankiw, and Sala-i-Martin (1995).

  7. 7.

    If initially \( \widehat{k}/\widehat{h}\ne \alpha /\phi, \) the households “jump” to the desired ratio. Here for simplicity we assume no adjustment costs or irreversibility constraints. If instead, physical or human capital is (realistically) assumed to be irreversible, then the model will involve transitional dynamics.

  8. 8.

    See, for example, Appendix 2B, Barro and Sala-i-Martin (1995).

  9. 9.

    Additionally, the transversality condition implies that s* < α + ϕ.

  10. 10.

    Note that in Eq. 7.29, the saving rate is defined in relation to the after-tax output. This definition is different from that of the “gross saving rate” in Barro, Mankiw, and Sala-i-Martin (1995).

  11. 11.

    We assume that n = 0.02, and (g + δ) = 0.08.

  12. 12.

    The infinite speed of convergence can be eliminated by introducing adjustment costs and irreversibility conditions for physical and human capital. However, such modifications do not eliminate the counterfactual prediction that convergence rates would be rapid in an open economy with perfect capital mobility. See Barro, Mankiw, and Sala-i-Martin (1995).

  13. 13.

    Again, we assume n = 0.02, and (g + δ) = 0.08.

  14. 14.

    Since our panel data method involves time periods of a 4-year span, the values of these variables are averages over the years in each time period.

  15. 15.

    As an alternative, instead of including the three control variables, we could include in the regression a “preferential policy index” variable. We use the provincial preferential policy index variables calculated in Démurger et al. (2002) (see Table 11 of Démurger et al. (2002)) for our regression. The results are summarized in Table 7.9. It is clear from a comparison between Table 7.9 and the few earlier tables (Tables 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, and 7.6) that the substitution of the preferential policy index variable for the three proxy variables does not change the results of the regression in any important ways.

  16. 16.

    Therefore, (g + δ) = 0.08, as we assumed earlier.

  17. 17.

    By replacing \( \ln \left(1-\theta \cdot \tilde{r}\right) \) with \( \theta \ln \left(1-\tilde{r}\right) \) in the regression equation, we are effectively creating a “measurement error” that we have to include in the error term of the regression equation. Thus the correlation between \( \theta \ln \left(1-\tilde{r}\right) \) and the “measurement error” causes a bias in the estimation of the coefficient on \( \ln \left(1-\tilde{r}\right) \) (and may also cause biases in the estimation of coefficients on other explanatory variables).

  18. 18.

    This is based on our regression results from some of our earlier studies.

References

  • Barro RJ, Sala-i-Martin X (1995) Economic growth. McGraw Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Barro RJ, Gregory Mankiw N, Sala-i-Martin X (1995) Capital mobility in neoclassical models of economic growth. Am Econ Rev 85:103–115

    Google Scholar 

  • Cass D (1965) Optimum growth in an aggregative model of capital accumulation. Rev Econ Stud 32(July):233–240

    Google Scholar 

  • Démurger S, Sachs JD, Woo WT, Bao S, Chang G, Mellinger A (2002) Geography, economic policy and regional development in China. Asian Econ Pap 1(1):146–197 (MIT Press)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koopmans TC (1965) On the concept of optimal economic growth. In: The econometric approach to development planning, Amsterdam, North Holland, paper provided by Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University in its series Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers with number 163, Yale University, New Haven, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsey F (1928) A mathematical theory of saving. Econ J 38(December):543–559

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romer D (2006) Advanced macroeconomics, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Solow RM (1956) A contribution to the theory of economic growth. Q J Econ 70:65–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Jiang, Y. (2014). Endogenous Saving, Interregional Capital Mobility, and Convergence across China. In: Openness, Economic Growth and Regional Disparities. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40666-9_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40666-9_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-40665-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-40666-9

  • eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsEconomics and Finance (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics