Neoclassical theory versus new economic geography: competing expectations of cross-regional variation in economic development. Ann Reg Sci

The Annals of Regional Science (Impact Factor: 1.03). 06/2010; 44(3):467-491. DOI: 10.1007/s00168-008-0278-z

ABSTRACT This paper uses data for 255 NUTS-2 European regions over the period 1995–2003 to test the relative explanatory performance
of two important rival theories seeking to explain variations in the level of economic development across regions, namely
the neoclassical model originating from the work of Solow (Q J Econ 70:65–94, 1956) and the so-called Wage equation, which
is one of a set of simultaneous equations consistent with the short-run equilibrium of new economic geography (NEG) theory,
as described by Fujita etal. (The spatial economy. Cities, regions, and international trade. The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1999).
The rivals are non-nested, so that testing is accomplished both by fitting the reduced form models individually and by simply
combining the two rivals to create a composite model in an attempt to identify the dominant theory. We use different estimators
for the resulting panel data model to account variously for interregional heterogeneity, endogeneity, and temporal and spatial
dependence, including maximum likelihood with and without fixed effects, two stage least squares and feasible generalised
spatial two stage least squares plus GMM; also most of these models embody a spatial autoregressive error process. These show
that the estimated NEG model parameters correspond to theoretical expectation, whereas the parameter estimates derived from
the neoclassical model reduced form are sometimes insignificant or take on counterintuitive signs. This casts doubt on the
appropriateness of neoclassical theory as a basis for explaining cross-regional variation in economic development in Europe,
whereas NEG theory seems to hold in the face of competition from its rival.

JEL ClassificationC33-O10

Download full-text


Available from: Bernard Fingleton, Sep 29, 2015
65 Reads
  • Source
    • "It is calculated as the gross output of the region minus the cost of producing intermediate inputs and supplies. Variation in GVA per capita can be viewed as a direct result of variation in factors that determine regional competitiveness (Fingleton and Fischer, 2010). Over the course of the 29 years analysed by this paper, GVA per capita in a number of the regions has varied dramatically. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose ‐ The purpose of this paper is to analyse income inequality for a sample of 14 European countries and their composite regions using data from the Cambridge Econometrics regional dataset from 1980 to 2009. The purpose of the paper is to provide insight into the dynamics of regional and national cohesion among the EU-14 countries studied. Design/methodology/approach ‐ Initially, inequality is decomposed using the Theil coefficient into between and within country inequality to assess the extent to which convergence has occurred. To investigate the underlying causes of the changes in inequality, the Theil coefficient is further decomposed to assess the contribution of productivity and employment-population ratio differentials to inequality. Findings ‐ The results indicate that while between-country inequality has declined, within-country inequality has increased by approximately 50 percent. Subsequent decomposition indicates that while productivity levels among regions have converged, the employment-population ratios have diverged substantially driving increasing levels of inequality. This suggests that while EU cohesion policies have reduced productivity inequalities they have had little effect in stimulating convergence of employment-population ratios across regions. Research limitations/implications ‐ The paper argues that national priorities, particularly in the context of the current European economic crisis, are likely to hinder European Union level policies to reduce income inequality at a regional level. This may result in further increases in regional inequality among European regions. Originality/value ‐ This paper's main contribution is to highlight how national convergence can lead to regional divergence being overlooked. The value of the paper is that it provides policy insights, based on empirical evidence, for European cohesion policy.
    Journal of Economic Studies 01/2013; 40(1). DOI:10.1108/01443581311283484
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Over the last 15 years, China has embarked on a massive expansion of its road network system, the centerpiece of which is the building of a 41,000 km National Expressway Network (NEN). As an integral part of China's "Go West" policy, the construction of this network is intended to assist in the catch-up of its lagging inland regions with its prosperous Eastern ones. This is in addition to its more general aim of contributing to national productivity and growth. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the aggregate and spatial economic impacts of the NEN. It adopts a counterfactual approach based on a structural new economic geography model in a methodology which combines econometric estimation with both GIS and simulation techniques. As such, this methodology represents an initial and innovative step towards making theoretical models of economic geography operational for impact evaluation purposes. Overall, we find that aggregate Chinese real income was approximately 6 percent higher than it would have been in 2007 had the NEN not been built. We do not find strong evidence of a reduction in disparities across prefectural level regions or of a reduction in urban-rural disparities. If anything, and contrary to its objectives, the NEN appears to have reinforced existing patterns of spatial inequality.
  • Source
Show more