Behavioral and Entropy Parameters in the Dynamic GTAP Model

doi:10.1017/CBO9781139059923.003

3 - Behavioral and Entropy Parameters in the Dynamic GTAP Model

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012

Alla Golub and

Robert A. McDougall

Edited by

Elena Ianchovichina and

Terrie L. Walmsley

Show author details

Alla Golub: Affiliation:
Purdue University, USA
Robert A. McDougall: Affiliation:
Purdue University, USA
Elena Ianchovichina: Affiliation:
The World Bank, Washington, DC
Terrie L. Walmsley: Affiliation:
Purdue University, Indiana

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Introduction

The dynamic theory in Chapter 2 describes various new parameters governing international capital mobility. This chapter examines what we can learn from country-panel data about the magnitude of these additional parameters, corresponding calibration procedures, and the manipulation of the parameters with an aggregation program. The new parameter file containing parameters used in the dynamic theory is a GEMPACK header array file; its contents are listed in Table 3.1.

The first new parameter listed in Table 3.1 is INC. This parameter is the initial income level across simulations and is used to calculate welfare measures in multiperiod simulations. It is represented in the unit US$ millions. The rest of the parameters in Table 3.1 can be grouped according to their role in the model: lagged adjustment parameters, elasticity of rate of return to capital with respect to capital stock, and parameters determining the allocation of regional wealth and composition of regional capital. These three parameter types are discussed in turn in this chapter.

Parameters Determining Lagged Adjustments

The investment theory presented in Chapter 2 is expressed in terms of gross rather than net rates of return, and it allows only zero or positive gross rates of return. However, net of depreciation, rates of return may be negative, and they may decline to the negative of the depreciation rate.

Type: Chapter
Information: Dynamic Modeling and Applications for Global Economic Analysis , pp. 71 - 119

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139059923.003 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 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.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bernard, A. B. and C. I., Jones. 1996a. “Comparing Apples to Oranges: Productivity Convergence and Measurement across Industries and Countries”. American Economic Review 86(5), 1216–38.Google Scholar

Bernard, A. B. and C. I., Jones. 1996b. “Productivity across Industries and Countries: Time Series Theory and Evidence.” Review of Economics and Statistics 78(1), 135–46.CrossRef Google Scholar

CalderönC., N.|Loayza C., N.|Loayza, and L., Servén. 2003. Do Capital Flows Respond to Risk and Return? Policy Research Working Paper Series 3059. Washington, DC: World Bank.CrossRef Google Scholar

Dimaranan, B. V. and R. A., McDougall. 2002. Global Trade, Assistance, and Production: The GTAP 5 Data Base. West Lafayette, IN: Center for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue University. Available at http://www.gtap.agecon.purdue.edu/databases/v5/v5 doco.asp.Google Scholar

Engel, R. F. 1982. “Autoregressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity with Estimates of the Variance of United Kingdom Inflation.” Econometrica 50, 987–1007.CrossRef Google Scholar

Feldstein, M. and C., Horioka. 1980. “Domestic Savings and International Capital Flows”. Economic Journal 90, 314–29.CrossRef Google Scholar

Ianchovichina, E. I. 1998. International Capital Linkages: Theory and Application in a Dynamic Computable General Equilibrium Model. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.Google Scholar

Kmenta, J. 1986. Elements of Econometrics, 2nd ed. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Kraay, A., N., Loayza, L., Serven, and J., Ventura. 2000, July. Country Portfolios. Working Paper Series No. 7795: 1-61. Washington, DC:National Bureau of Economic Research.CrossRef Google Scholar

Kraay, A. and J., Ventura. 2000. “Current Accounts in Debtor and Creditor Countries”. Quarterly Journal of Economics 95, 1137–66.Google Scholar

Larson, D. F., R., Butzer, Y., Mundlack, and A., Crego. 2000. “A Cross-Country Database for Sector Investment and Capital”. World Bank Economic Review 14, 371–91.CrossRef Google Scholar

Levin, A. and C.-F., Lin. 1992. Unit Root Tests in Panel Data: Asymptotic and Finite-Sample Properties. Discussion Paper 92–23. San Diego: Department of Economics, University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar

Lewis, K. K. 1999. “Trying to Explain Home Bias in Equities and Consumption”. Journal of Economic Literature 37, 571–608.CrossRef Google Scholar

Nehru, V. and A., Dhareshwar. 1993. “A New Database on Physical Capital Stock: Sources, Methodology and Results”. Revista de Analisis Economico 8(1), 37–59.Google Scholar

Nin, A., T. W., Hertel., K., Foster, and A., Rae. 2004. “Productivity Growth, Catching-Up and Uncertainty in China's Meat Trade”. Agricultural Economics 31, 1–16.Google Scholar

OECD. 1993. Methods Used by OECD Countries to Measure Stocks of Fixed Capital. Paris: OECD.

Source OECD. Annual National Accounts Volume II – Detailed Tables – Main Aggregates Volume2004 release 01. Available at http://iris.sourceoecd.org/vl/158758/cl=20/nw=1/rpsv/home.htm.

Statistics Directorate OECD. 1983, 1987, 1991, 1994, 1996, 1997. Flows and Stocks of Fixed Capital. Paris: OECD.

Walton, R. 2000a, January. “International Comparison of Profitability”. Economics Trends554.Google Scholar

Walton, R. 2000b, December. “International Comparison of Company Profitability”. Economic Trends565.Google Scholar