Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T10:12:49.077Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

DIRECTED STRUCTURAL CHANGE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2017

Robert F. Kane
Robert F. Kane*
Affiliation:
International University of Japan
*
Address correspondence to: Robert F. Kane, International University of Japan, 777 Kokusai-cho Minami-uonuma NiigataJapan949-7277; e-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper extends the existing theories of directed technical change by allowing the factors of production, skilled, and unskilled workers, to be employed in both the skill-intensive and unskilled-intensive sectors. Consequently, the direction of technical progress and the sectoral allocation of factors are jointly determined. The feedback between technical progress and the allocation of factors leads to new results concerning structural change and directed technical change. An increase in the endowment of a factor leads to a dynamic reallocation of factors toward the sector that uses the factor intensively. The reallocation of factors also affects the stability properties of directed technical change. When the parameter conditions necessary for strong bias are satisfied, the interior regime (nonspecialization) is at most locally stable. More importantly, if the relative endowment of skilled labor becomes too high (low), the economy necessarily specializes in the production of skilled (unskilled)-labor-intensive goods. Last, the relationship between the relative endowment of skilled labor and the steady-state relative wage rate is not necessarily monotonic.

Keywords

Endogenous GrowthDirected Technical ChangeStructural Change
Type
Articles
Information
Macroeconomic Dynamics , Volume 23 , Issue 5 , July 2019 , pp. 1921 - 1958
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

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.)

Footnotes

I thank Daron Acemoğlu, several anonymous referees, and Lei Ji for helpful insight. I am particularly indebted to John Seater and Pietro Peretto.

References

REFERENCES

Acemoglu, D. (1998) Why do new technologies complement skills? Directed technical change and wage inequality. Quarterly Journal of Economics 113 (4), 1055–1089.Google Scholar
Acemoglu, D. (2002) Directed technical change. Review of Economic Studies 69 (4), 781–809.Google Scholar
Acemoglu, D. (2007) Equilibrium bias of technology. Econometrica 75 (5), 1371–1409.Google Scholar
Acemoglu, D. and Autor, D. H. (2011) Skills, tasks and technologies: Implications for employment and earnings. In Ashenfelter, O. and Card, D. E. (eds.), Handbook of Labor Economics, vol. 4, chap. 12, pp. 1043–1171. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Acemoglu, D. and Guerrieri, V. (2008) Capital deepening and nonbalanced economic growth. Journal of Political Economy 116 (3), 467–498.Google Scholar
Acemoglu, D. and Zilibotti, F. (2001) Productivity differences. Quarterly Journal of Economics 116 (2), 563–606.Google Scholar
Buera, F. J. and Kaboski, J. P. (2012) The rise of the service economy. American Economic Review 102 (6), 2540–69.Google Scholar
Dolores Guilló, M., Papageorgiou, C., and Perez-Sebastian, F. (2011) A unified theory of structural change. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 35 (9), 1393–1404.Google Scholar
Galor, O. and Moav, O. (2000) Ability-biased technological transition, wage inequality, and economic growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics 115 (2), 469–497.Google Scholar
Goldin, C. D. and Katz, L. F. (2008) The Race between Education and Technology. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Herrendorf, B., Rogerson, R., and Valentinyi, K. (2014) Growth and structural transformation. In Aghion, P. and Durlauf, S. N. (eds.), Handbook of Economic Growth, vol. 2B, chap. 6, pp. 855–941. Amsterdam and New York: North Holland.Google Scholar
Hsieh, C.-T. and Klenow, P. J. (2009) Misallocation and manufacturing TFP in China and India. Quarterly Journal of Economics 124 (4), 1403–1448.Google Scholar
McAdam, P. and Willman, A. (2017) Unraveling the skill premium. Macroeconomic Dynamics 1–30. doi:10.1017/S1365100516000547.Google Scholar
Ngai, L. R. and Pissarides, C. A. (2007) Structural change in a multisector model of growth. American Economic Review 97 (1), 429–443.Google Scholar
Peretto, P. F. and Seater, J. J. (2013) Factor-eliminating technical change. Journal of Monetary Economics 60 (4), 459–473.Google Scholar
Rivera-Batiz, L. A. and Romer, P. M. (1991) Economic integration and endogenous growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics 106 (2), 531–55.Google Scholar
Rogerson, R., Kaboski, J., and Buera, F. (2015) Skill-Biased Structural Change and the Skill Premium. Meeting papers 895, Society for Economic Dynamics.Google Scholar
Romer, P. M. (1990) Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy 98 (5), S71–S102.Google Scholar
Rybczynski, T. M. (1955) Factor endowment and relative commodity prices. Economica 22 (88), 336–341.Google Scholar
Stolper, W. F. and Samuelson, P. A. (1941) Protection and real wages. Review of Economic Studies 9 (1), 58–73.Google Scholar
Zuleta, H. and Young, A. T. (2013) Labor shares in a model of induced innovation. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 24 (C), 112–122.Google Scholar