The Output Convergence Debate Revisited: Lessons from recent developments in the analysis of panel data models
重审产出收敛争论：面板数据模型分析新进展的启示AI 解读 ↓
← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明
本页整理公开书目信息，不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成，未完成全文核验，可能有误；具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本，未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要；缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
本页为预印本版本；arXiv 收录、作者填写的期刊信息以及作者既有发表经历，都不单独证明本篇已接收。作者发表记录按 OpenAlex 身份与完整姓名、本站覆盖期刊 ISSN 及正式卷期核对，只展示已核实例，档案仍可能误合并。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录，不合计多个记录；关联记录可能包含正式发表版本，不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零，引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配，同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列，再参考通用方法与发表日期。
分类依据与纠错
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类：摘要明确使用跨国动态异质面板、交互效应和潜在技术因子分析增长收敛，直接对应宏观面板与因子模型。
反馈分类问题
正在核对关联版本…
代码、数据与补充材料
正在核对对应版本的资源…
关注这篇论文的作者
重审产出收敛争论：面板数据模型分析新进展的启示
- 研究问题
- 在国家间趋势不平行、动态反应异质且存在共同技术因素时，常用跨国回归和双向固定效应会怎样影响收敛判断？
- 方法与思路
- 作者采用具有交互效应的动态异质面板框架，讨论动态共同相关效应估计，并提出估计缓慢变化增长决定因素作用的方法。
- 材料陈述的贡献
- 摘要称常用方法低估收敛速度；跨国数据分析分别考察产出水平、增长与国内收敛，并报告资本及制度因素的相关结果。
- 阅读关注点
- 核对不同收敛概念与速度的定义、共同技术因子的处理，以及一致性结论适用条件和缓慢变化变量的估计依据。
- 阅读边界
- 这是 arXiv 预印本，同行评审及期刊接收未核实；摘要未列完整理论条件、估计数值及不确定性，稳健性陈述需结合具体设定。
原文摘要
This paper provides a critical examination of the empirical basis of the output convergence debate in the light of recent developments in the analysis of dynamic heterogeneous panels with interactive effects. It shows that popular tools such as Barro's cross-country regressions and two-way fixed effects (TWFE) estimators that assume parallel trends and homogeneous dynamics lead to substantial under-estimation of the speed of convergence and misleading inference. Instead, dynamic common correlated effects (DCCE) estimators due to Chudik and Pesaran (2015a) provide consistent estimates and valid inference that are robust to nonparallel trends and correlated heterogeneity and apply even if there are breaks, trends and/or unit roots in the latent technology factor. It also suggests a way to estimate the effect of slowly moving determinants of growth. The theoretical findings are augmented with empirical evidence using Penn World Tables data, finding little evidence of per capita output convergence across countries, very slow evidence of cross country growth convergence, and reasonably fast within country convergence. Capital accumulation is found to be the most important single determinant of cross-country differences in output while slow moving indicators such as potential for conflict and protection of property rights proved to be statistically significant determinants of the steady state levels of output per capita. We are also able to replicate a positive evidence of democratization on output, but we find that the statistical significance of this effect to fall as we allow for nonparallel trends and dynamic heterogeneity.