Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T02:50:43.609Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

DOES THE CAPITAL INTENSITY MATTER? EVIDENCE FROM THE POSTWAR JAPANESE ECONOMY AND OTHER OECD COUNTRIES

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2012

Harutaka Takahashi ,
Koichi Mashiyama  and
Tomoya Sakagami
Harutaka Takahashi*
Affiliation:
Meiji Gakuin University
Koichi Mashiyama
Affiliation:
Meiji Gakuin University
Tomoya Sakagami
Affiliation:
Kumamoto Gakuen University
*
Address correspondence to: Harutaka Takahashi, Department of Economics, Meiji Gakuin University, 1-2-37 Shirokanedai, Minato-ku Tokyo, 108-8636Japan; e-mail: haru@eco.meijigakuin.ac.jp.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The capital intensity takes an important role in two-sector and multisector growth models. Surprisingly very few empirical studies have been conducted so far except by Kuga (1967). This fact implies that few people have ever tried to perform any empirical research to study whether the two-sector and multisector optimal growth models could explain the economic development properly based on the empirical data. Although we witnessed fairly active theoretical research on two-sector and multisector growth models in the 1990s and recent years, R. M. Solow has thrown doubt on the capital intensities [in Philippe Aghion and Steven Durlauf (eds.), Handbook of Economic Growth, Vol. 1A (2005, pp. 3–10)]. Our purpose is to measure the capital intensities of the consumption good and the investment good sectors mainly in the postwar Japanese economy, and also in other OECD countries. By so doing, we will demonstrate that the capital intensity does matter and our empirical evidence will strongly support the common assumption that the consumption goods sector is more capital-intensive than the capital goods sector.

Keywords

Two-Sector ModelI–O TableCapital IntensityCapital-Intensity ReversalSolow–Swan Growth Model
Type
Articles
Information
Macroeconomic Dynamics , Volume 16 , Supplement S1: Nonlinear Dynamics in Equilibrium Models , April 2012 , pp. 103 - 116
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Baumol, William J. (1967) Macroeconomics of unbalanced growth: The anatomy of urban crisis. American Economic Review 57, 415–426.Google Scholar
Benhabib, Jess and Nishimura, Kazuo (1985) Competitive equilibrium cycles. Journal of Economic Theory 35, 284–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benhabib, Jess, Nishimura, Kazuo, and Venditti, Alain (2002) Indeterminacy and cycles in two-sector discrete-time models. Economic Theory 30, 217–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bond, Eric, Wang, P., and Yip, C. (1996) A general two-sector model of endogenous growth with human and physical capital: Balanced growth and transition dynamics. Journal of Economic Theory 68, 149–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dollar, David and Wolff, E. (1994) Capital-intensity and TFP convergence by industry in manufacturing, 1963–1985. In Baumol, W., Nelson, R., and Wolff, E. (eds.), Convergence of Productivity, pp. 197–224. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oded, Galor (1992) A two-sector overlapping-generations model: A global characterization of the dynamical system. Econometrica 69, 1351–1386.Google Scholar
Simon, Gilchrist and John, C. Williams (2001) Transition Dynamics in Vintage Capital Models: Explaining the Post-war Catch-Up of Germany and Japan. Finance and economics discussion paper 2001/07, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yutaka, Kosai (1986) The Era of High-Speed Growth. Tokyo: Tokyo University Press.Google Scholar
Kuga, Kiyoshi (1967) On the capital-intensity hypothesis. Economic Studies Quarterly 18, 151–159.Google Scholar
Leontief, Wassily W. (1954) Domestic production and foreign trade: The American capital position reexamined. Economia Internazional 7, 5–32.Google Scholar
Miller, Ronald and Blair, P. (2009) Input–Output Analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mino, Kazuo (1992) Analysis of a two-sector model of endogenous growth with capital income taxation. International Economic Review 37, 227–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nishimura, Kazuo and Takahashi, Harutaka (1992) Factor intensity and Hopf bifurcation. In Feichtinger, G. (ed.), Optimal Control Theory and Economic Analysis 4, pp. 135–149. North-Holland.Google Scholar
Nishimura, Kazuo and Venditti, Alain (2004) Indeterminacy and the role of factor substitutability. Macroeconomic Dynamics 8, 436–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nishimura, Kazuo and Yano, Makoto (1995) Non-linear dynamics and chaos in optimal growth: An example. Econometrica 63, 998–1001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okuno-Fujiwara, Masahiro and Shell, Karl (2009) MD interview: An interview with Professor Hirofumi Uzawa. Macroeconomic Dynamics 13, 390–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solow, Robert (2005) Reflections on growth theory. In Aghion, Philippe and Durlauf, Steven (eds.), Handbook of Economic Growth, vol. 1A, pp. 3–10. North-Holland.Google Scholar
Takahashi, Harutaka (2001) Stable optimal cycles with small discounting in a two-sector discrete-time model: A non-bifurcation approach. Japanese Economic Review 52, 328–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Takahashi, Harutaka (2009) An unbalanced multi-sector growth model with constant returns: A turnpike approach. Bulletin of Institute for Research in Business and Economics 26, 1–26.Google Scholar
Uzawa, Hirofumi (1962) On a two-sector model of economic growth. Review of Economic Studies 14, 40–47.Google Scholar
Uzawa, Hirofumi (1963) On a two-sector model of economic growth II. Review of Economic Studies 19, 105–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uzawa, Hirofumi (1964) Optimal growth in a two-sector model of capital accumulation. Review of Economic Studies 31, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolff, Edward N. (2004) What has happened to the Leontief paradox? In Dietzenbacher, E. and Lahr, M. (eds.), Wassily Leontief and Input–Output Economics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar