| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Enflo, Kerstin
(author)
-
Covergence or Divergence? An efficiency approach to European Regional Growth 1980-2002
- 2005
-
Conference paper (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The study investigates the changing growth pattern of 69 European regions measured at NUTS-level 2 between 1980 and 2002 by addressing the hypothesis of capital accumulation versus technological change as sources of convergence or divergence. The paper adds to the existing regional growth and convergence literature in three respects. First, regional estimates of capital stocks are constructed from regional investment series using the Perpetual Inventory Method (PIM). Second, and in contrast to earlier regional growth studies that use standard regression analysis or cluster analysis, the study utilizes Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) combined with a recently proposed decomposition of productivity growth (Kumar & Russell: 2002) into three factors: capital accumulation; technical change and relative efficiency improvements (“catch-up”). The advantage of DEA is that it is non-parametric and requires no a priori specification of the functional form of the productivity frontier. In addition, it allows for a dynamic analysis that can reveal historical lead-lag patterns and identify shifts in the constructed worldwide production frontier. Third, the analysis is extended to address the dynamics of the regional productivity distribution in order to investigate questions of convergence, divergence or the emergence of European “regional clubs” in accordance with the ideas expressed in Quah (1996). From a tentative analysis two results emerge: (i) Capital accumulation and technological change seem to have played equally important roles in increasing labour productivity during the investigated time period. However, relative efficiency improvements seem to have been virtually absent. This suggests that the ranking of regions has remained stable over the time period and that few regions have managed to improve their relative positions. In opposition with standard neoclassical growth models, it also appears that capital accumulation has had a slightly diverging effect on the labour productivity distribution, rather than causing convergence. (ii) Technology is clearly not Hicks neutral, meaning that technological change and technology adaption seem to occur mainly in highly capitalized regions. This finding further highlights the importance of understanding the process of technology diffusion for patterns of growth.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Enflo, Kerstin, et al.
(author)
-
Electrification and Energy Productivity
- 2009
-
In: Ecological Economics. - : Elsevier BV. - 0921-8009. ; 68:11, s. 2808-2817
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Energy productivity is crucial for sustainable development.We use cointegration analyses to investigate the effect of electricity on energy productivity in Swedish industry from 1930 to 1990. Electricity augmented energy productivity in those industrial branches that used electricity formultiple purposes. This productivity effect goes beyond “book-keeping effects,” i. e. it is not only the result of electricity being produced in one sector (taking the energy transformation losses) and consumed in another (receiving the benefits).
|
|
| 8. |
- Enflo, Kerstin, et al.
(author)
-
Growth accounting in times of turbulence and death: efficiency, technology, capital accumulation and human capital 1929-1950
- 2007
-
Other publication (other academic/artistic)abstract
- We employ a non-parametrical approach to growth accounting (Data Envelopment Analysis, DEA) to disentangle the proximate sources of labour productivity growth in 41 nations between 1929 and 1950 by decomposing productivity growth into four components: technological change; efficiency catch-up (movements towards the production frontier), capital accumulation and human capital accumulation. We show that efficiency catch-up generally explains productivity growth, whereas technological change and factor accumulation were limited and distorted by the effects of war. War clearly hampered efficiency. Moreover, an unbalanced ratio of human capital to physical capital (a gap to the technological leader) was crucial for efficiency catching-up.
|
|
| 9. |
- Enflo, Kerstin, et al.
(author)
-
Identifying development blocks - A new methodology Implemented on Swedish industry 1900–1974
- 2008
-
In: Journal of Evolutionary Economics. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0936-9937 .- 1432-1386. ; 18:1, s. 57-76
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The paper specifies a quantitative methodology for exploring development blocks. The concept of 'development block' was a major contribution to the historical analysis of industrial transformation by the late Erik Dahmen, but development blocks have mainly been analyzed by qualitative methods and indirect indicators and not statistically identified. In this paper, development blocks are identified by means of a combination of co-integration analysis and Granger causality. Using these techniques, we are able to identify two partially overlapping development blocks in the Swedish economy, formed around the electricity generating sector: one with metal, metal goods, machinery and railways; and another with pulp and paper, chemicals, and machinery.
|
|
| 10. |
- Enflo, Kerstin
(author)
-
Investeringar, FoU och tillväxt
- 2006
-
Reports (other academic/artistic)abstract
- Sweden’s investment level has recently been the subject of keen debate. One fact that is often brought up is the fall in Swedish investment as a proportion of GDP (investment ratio) and that the current level of Swedish investment is below that of other countries. In the long run, low investment can weaken a country’s potential for growth. Although Swedish investment is comparatively low, Sweden invests more in research and development (R&D) in relation to GDP than any other country in the OECD, a top position it has held for 10 years. Consequently, there appears to be a paradox in Swedish development with high R&D investment and modest investment in the expansion of the productive apparatus in the form of fixed capital investment. All in all, the empirical review provides a somewhat more balanced picture of the Swedish investment climate than has emerged from the recent debate. Even though the Swedish investment ratio has fallen to a historically low level for the post-war period, a similar reduction has also taken place throughout the Western world. It also appears that the downward trend may be about to break, as Statistics Sweden (SCB) predicts a massive increase in private investment in 2005. Sweden’s position at the bottom of the European investment league can also be explained by record-low investment in Swedish housing since the start of the 1990s. Despite these extenuating circumstances, however, the empirical review points out a number of ill-boding circumstances for Sweden’s future as a growth nation. Above all, it is hard to find evidence for the hypothesis that Swedish industry as a whole has undergone a structural transformation towards more knowledge-intensive production and that this could explain the low level of investment in fixed capital. Instead, it appears that Swedish investment is low for all trades. Furthermore, Swedish development does not show any signs of a strong existence of complementarity at trade level between investing in R&D and in fixed capital over time. The lack of complementarity between investment in R&D and fixed capital is evidence of the thesis that Swedish R&D is not commercialised in R&D-intensive production and exports. Moreover, only a very small proportion of all companies within industry invested in R&D at all in 2002. The fact that there is such a split in the Swedish company structure between those that invest in R&D and those that invest in fixed capital could be an indication that companies that have specialised in manufacturing find it difficult to utilise positive spillover effects of R&D from big companies. From a policy perspective, past development therefore points to the importance of encouraging Swedish and foreign investment by creating a good business climate in Sweden. Special emphasis should be placed on supporting knowledge-intensive companies as Sweden has previously shown comparative advantages of such production through strong growth in productivity and exports, while knowledge-intensive activity has the potential of great spillover effects in society.
|
|
