Hostname: page-component-7f64f4797f-m2b9p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-11-04T00:35:40.922Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A NOTE ON THE EXTENT OF U.S. REGIONAL INCOME CONVERGENCE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 June 2013

Mark J. Holmes ,
Jesús Otero  and
Theodore Panagiotidis
Mark J. Holmes*
Affiliation:
Waikato University
Jesús Otero
Affiliation:
Universidad del Rosario
Theodore Panagiotidis
Affiliation:
University of Macedonia
*
Address correspondence to: Mark J. Holmes, Department of Economics, Waikato University, New Zealand; e-mail: holmesmj@waikato.ac.nz.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Long-run income convergence is investigated in the U.S. context. We employ a novel pairwise econometric procedure based on a probabilistic definition of convergence. The time-series properties of all the possible regional income pairs are examined by means of unit root and non-cointegration tests, where inference is based on the fraction of rejections. We distinguish between the cases of strong convergence, where the implied cointegrating vector is [1, −1], and weak convergence, where long-run homogeneity is relaxed. To address cross-sectional dependence, we employ a bootstrap methodology to derive the empirical distribution of the fraction of rejections. We find supporting evidence of U.S. states sharing a common stochastic trend consistent with a definition of convergence based on long-run forecasts of state incomes being proportional rather than equal. We find that the strength of convergence between states decreases with distance and initial income disparity. Using Metropolitan Statistical Area data, evidence for convergence is stronger.

Keywords

Panel DataCross-section DependencePairwise ApproachIncomeConvergence

Information

Type
Note
Information
Macroeconomic Dynamics , Volume 18 , Issue 7 , October 2014 , pp. 1635 - 1655
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Bai, Jushan and Ng, Serena (2002) Determining the number of factors in approximate factor models. Econometrica 70, 191–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barro, Robert J. (1991) Economic growth in a cross section of countries. Quarterly Journal of Economics 106, 407–443.Google Scholar
Barro, Robert J. and Sala-i-Martin, Xavier (1991) Convergence across states and regions. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 1, 107–182.Google Scholar
Barro, Robert J. and Sala-i-Martin, Xavier (1992) Convergence. Journal of Political Economy 100, 223–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barro, Robert J. and Sala-i-Martin, Xavier (1999) Economic Growth. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Baumol, William J. 1986) Productivity, growth, convergence and welfare: What the long-run data show. American Economic Review 76, 1072–1085.Google Scholar
Bernard, Andrew B. and Durlauf, Steven N. (1995) Convergence in international output. Journal of Applied Econometrics 10, 97–108.Google Scholar
Carlino, Gerald A. and Mills, Leonard O. (1993) Are U.S. regional incomes converging? A time series analysis. Journal of Monetary Economics 32, 335–346.Google Scholar
Cheung, Yin-Wong and Lai, Kon S. (1995) Lag order and critical values of the augmented Dickey–Fuller test. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 13, 277–280.Google Scholar
Choi, Chi-Young (2004) A reexamination of output convergence in the US states: Toward which level(s) are they converging? Journal of Regional Science 44, 713–741.Google Scholar
Deckers, Thomas and Hanck, Christoph (2012) Multiple testing for output convergence. Macroeconomic Dynamics, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1365100512000338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickey, David A. and Fuller, Wayne A. (1979) Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Journal of the American Statistical Association 74, 427–431.Google Scholar
Elliott, Graham, Rothenberg, Thomas J., and Stock, James H. (1996) Efficient tests for an autoregressive unit root. Econometrica 64, 813–836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, Paul and Karras, Georgios (1996) Convergence revisited. Journal of Monetary Economics 37, 249–265.Google Scholar
Garrett, Thomas A., Wagner, Gary A., and Wheelock, David C. (2007) Regional disparities in the spatial correlation of state income growth, 1977–2002. Annals of Regional Science 41, 601–618.Google Scholar
Im, Kyung S., Pesaran, M. Hashem, and Shin, Yongcheol (2003) Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. Journal of Econometrics 115, 53–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inklaar, Robert and Timmer, Marcel P. (2009) Productivity convergence across industries and countries: The importance of theory-based measurement. Macroeconomic Dynamics 13, 218–240.Google Scholar
Johansen, Soren (1988) Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 12, 231–254.Google Scholar
Krugman, Paul (1991) Increasing returns and economic geography. Journal of Political Economy 99, 433–499.Google Scholar
Krugman, Paul and Venables, Anthony J. (1995) Globalisation and the inequality of nations. Quarterly Journal of Economics 110, 857–880.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LePen, Yannick Pen, Yannick (2011) A pair-wise approach to output convergence between European regions. Economic Modelling 28, 955–964.Google Scholar
Levin, Andrew, Lin, Chien-fu, and Chu, Chia-Shang (2002) Unit root tests in panel data: Asymptotic and finite-sample properties. Journal of Econometrics 108, 1–24.Google Scholar
MacKinnon, James G., Haug, Alfred, and Michelis, Leo (1999) Numerical distribution functions of likelihood ratio tests for cointegration. Journal of Applied Econometrics 14, 563–577.Google Scholar
Maddala, Gangadharrao S. and Wu, Shaowen (1999) A comparative study of unit root tests with panel data and a new simple test. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 61, 631–652.Google Scholar
Mankiw, N.Gregory, David Romer, and Weil, David N. (1992) A contribution to the empirics of economic growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics 107, 407–437.Google Scholar
Mello, Marcello (2011) Stochastic convergence across U.S. states. Macroeconomic Dynamics 15, 160–183.Google Scholar
Papageorgiou, Chris and Perez-Sebastian, Fidel (2004) Can transition dynamics explain the international output data? Macroeconomic Dynamics 8, 466–492.Google Scholar
Pedroni, Peter (2001) Purchasing power parity in cointegrated panels. Review of Economics and Statistics 83, 727–731.Google Scholar
Pesaran, M. Hashem (2007) A pair-wise approach to testing for output and growth convergence. Journal of Econometrics 138, 312–355.Google Scholar
Pesaran, M. Hashem, Smith, Ron P., Yamagata, Takashi, and Hvozdyk, Liudmyla (2009) Pairwise tests of purchasing power parity. Econometric Reviews 28, 495–521.Google Scholar
Quah, Danny (1993) Galton's fallacy and tests of the convergence hypothesis. Scandinavian Journal of Economics 95, 427–443.Google Scholar
Quah, Danny (1997) Empirics for growth and distribution: Polarization, stratification and convergence club. Journal of Economic Growth 2, 27–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quintos, Carmela E. (1995) Sustainability of the deficit process with structural shifts. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 13, 409–417.Google Scholar
Sala-i-Martin, Xavier (1996) The classical approach to convergence analysis. Economic Journal 106, 1019–1036.Google Scholar
Tsionas, Efthymios G. (2001) Regional convergence and common stochastic long-run trends: A re-examination of the US regional data. Regional Studies 35, 689–696.Google Scholar