Contenido

La variación a corto plazo del crecimiento económico se conoce como ciclo económico, y casi todas las economías viven etapas de recesión de forma periódica. El ciclo puede confundirse puesto que las fluctuaciones no son siempre regulares. La explicación de estas fluctuaciones es una de las tareas principales de la macroeconomía. Hay diferentes escuelas de pensamiento que estudian las causas de las recesiones y las políticas necesarias para salir de ellas (véase keynesianismo, monetarismo, economía neoclásica y neokeynesiana). La variación a corto plazo del crecimiento económico ha sido minimizada en los países de mayores ingresos desde principios de los 90, lo que se atribuye en parte a una mejor gestión macroeconómica.

El estudio del crecimiento económico de largo plazo es un asunto fundamental del estudio de la economía. A pesar de las advertencias enumeradas anteriormente, el aumento del PIB de un país suele considerarse como un aumento en el nivel de vida de sus habitantes. En períodos largos, incluso pequeñas tasas de crecimiento anual pueden tener un efecto significativo debido a su conjugación con otros factores. Una tasa de crecimiento del 2,5% anual conduciría al PIB a duplicarse en un plazo de 30 años, mientras de una tasa de crecimiento del 8% anual (experimentada por algunos países como los cuatro dragones asiáticos) llevaría al mismo fenómeno en un plazo de solo 10 años. Cuando una población aumenta, para ver mejoras en el nivel de vida, el PIB tiene que crecer más rápido que esa población. Este análisis busca entender porque existen tasas muy dispares de crecimiento económico en algunas regiones del mundo.

Historical growth since the 19th century

Until the end of the century there were no sufficiently detailed statistics to calculate economic growth. For the past, A. Maddison (2001) presented estimated calculations that, in line with other sources, show that economic growth during the Middle Ages and up to the century was slow.[7]​ From 1870 until the First World War, growth was very rapid. During World War I, the interwar Great Depression, and World War II, growth slowed somewhat, although it remained high relative to pre-century rates. After the end of the last World War came the golden age of economic growth between 1945 and 1970, with an expansion without parallel in history.[8]​ From 1970 to the present to 2007 it was slower, but still high; This does present an increase in the growth difference between rich countries, which grew somewhat faster, and poor countries. Historically, growth before the century between rich and poor countries had been more balanced.

Sustained economic growth

It is a relatively new concept in human history. The GDP growth for years was very low so it was not taken into consideration by the thinkers of the time. It was not until after 1800 that GDP per capita could change living standards in just one or two generations. Growth rates differ between nations and a variation in it over a period of one year has a great impact on the level of per capita income over a long period.

Income growth can be divided into two main categories: growth from increased income (e.g. capital "Capital (economy)"), labor "Labor (economy)")) and productivity increases (e.g. new technologies). In the long run, technological progress is necessary in order to improve living standards, since it is not possible to increase incomes indefinitely through work, and the attempt to constantly add capital to the production process will necessarily run into decreasing marginal paybacks (see foundations of production theory).

In fact, this is an approximate rule, although numerically very exact, since the number of years required to double income is given by:[9]​.

Exogenous and endogenous models

In the theory of exogenous economic growth, the models of Solow (1956),[10]​ Ramsey (1928),[11]​ Harrod-Domar (1939)[12]​ (1946)[13]​ and Kaldor stand out.[14]​ They are called exogenous because the variable that explains economic growth is taken as "exogenous", that is, as a variable that is not explained by the model.

In the theory of endogenous economic growth, the models of Romer (1986)[15]​ (1990),[16]​ Barro (1990),[17]​ Learning-by-doing (1962),[18]​ Uzawa-Lucas (1965)[19]​ (1988),[20]​ Shumpeter,[21]​ among others stand out. They are called endogenous because the variable that explains economic growth is explained by the model. And thus they offer clearer elements of public policy.

Acemoglu and Robinson

Acemoglu and Robinson (2012) Why do countries fail?[22]​ maintain that above all a country needs political stability to develop economically. Furthermore, Acemoglu and Robinson say that the industrial revolution began in Britain because it was the first country to allow the creative destruction necessary to grow economically on the frontiers of technology. This was guaranteed by their 1689 Bill of Rights, according to Acemoglu and Robinson.

For example, they highlight that Denis Papin built a steamboat in 1705. He sailed down the Fulda River to the city of Münden in Germany, where a boatmen's guild destroyed his boat and steam engine, since they did not want competition. Pepin then went to England, where the Royal Society published several scientific papers he wrote describing his work. Unfortunately, he did not receive any compensation for those documents. He died destitute in London and was buried in an unmarked grave.

Thomas Newcomen built a steam engine using ideas from Pepin and others. Newcomen's machine became a commercial success, pumping water from coal mines that otherwise could not have been worked. Acemoglu and Robinson said the 1689 Bill of Rights allowed creative destruction that had been blocked in Germany.

Neoclassical growth models

Solow's (1956) growth model was the first attempt to analytically guide long-term growth. This model, like other traditional growth models (Cass (1965), Koopmans (1965)), explains differences in per capita income in terms of the accumulation of (physical) capital. In these two models, the differences in the accumulated factor are due to differences in savings rates: for Solow they are determined exogenously, for Ramsey it is determined endogenously through intertemporal utility maximization.

The Solow model predicts convergence toward a steady state; In that steady state, all per capita growth arises from technological progress. Starting from identical factors in terms of institutions (government and central banks), added production functions and savings measures, all countries would tend to converge towards the same steady state. Taking into account that not all countries have the same characteristics, it is possible that not all countries in the world converge due to different levels of steady state. In fact, examining empirical data, convergence is only observable to a limited extent.

Exogenous growth models do not explain the key variable that tells us why economies grow and why they do so at different rates. The theory of endogenous growth tries to "endogenize" the variable of technical progress. And to do so, it resorts to human capital (e.g. education), technological change (e.g. innovation), externalities, etc. North and Thomas (1973)[23]​ maintain that the fundamental explanation for economic growth is institutions.

The Washington consensus and its implications for theory

In the 1990s, John Williamson&action=edit&redlink=1 "John Williamson (economist) (not yet drafted)") published the Washington Consensus, which was suggested to all developing countries to achieve growth.

The World Development Report (1991) argued that the functions of growth - capital accumulation, efficient use of resources, technological progress, and a socially acceptable distribution of income - were best achieved in countries with macroeconomic stability, market distribution of resources, and openness to international trade. A sustained growth policy requires risk reduction, ensuring that serious financial crises do not occur. Finally, governments obviously need to support reforms that eliminate or at least reduce constraints on growth.[24]​.

However, although structural reforms were carried out in many countries (such as Latin America), the expected results were not obtained.[25]​[26]​.

Other explanations

Jevons claimed in the century that economic fluctuations were related to sunspots. Today the theories of economic growth are very diverse and those that seek explanation in institutions stand out. Institutional differences would be explained due to cultural traits, geography, latitude, ideology or historical accidents, etc. Thus, for example, today there are those who highlight that cold countries like Sweden are more economically successful than hot countries like Nigeria. In early stages of human history, economic and cultural development was concentrated in the hot places on Earth, like Egypt. Today, however, the cold states of the North have higher per capita GDP rates than those of the hot states of the Tropics. This aspect of economics (economic geography)--and its influence on human migrations and political structures--was thoroughly studied by Ellsworth Huntington, professor of Economics at Yale University at the beginning of the century.

El crecimiento económico afecta a todas las esferas: social, económica, política... El sistema actual asocia este crecimiento con el progreso y bienestar, relación cuestionada habitualmente por los críticos del capitalismo. En palabras del profesor de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid Carlos Taibo:.

El intento de promover el crecimiento económico por encima de cualquier otra consideración mensurable es un síntoma de lo que se conoce como productivismo, un término que se suele utilizar en tono despectivo.

The limits to growth

The limits to growth debate is about the ecological impact of growth and the creation of wealth and progress. Many of the activities necessary for economic growth make use of non-renewable energy sources. Many researchers believe that these continued environmental effects may in turn have an effect on global ecosystems.

This impact on the environment is what the ecological footprint tries to quantify. Thus, for the year 2005 the number of global hectares (bioproductive hectares) per person was estimated at 2.1. However, for the entire world, consumption stood at 2.7. Therefore, at least for this year (and the trend is increasing, since in 2003 the global ecological footprint was estimated at 2.23), we were over-consuming with respect to the planet's capacity; In other words, we are destroying resources at a speed greater than their natural regeneration rate.

They claim that the cumulative effects on ecosystems impose a theoretical limit on growth. Some turn to archeology to cite examples of cultures that seem to have disappeared because they grew beyond the capacity of their ecosystems to house them, as Duncan claims, for example, will also happen with our civilization (Olduvai Theory). His prediction is that limits to growth could end up making growth based on the consumption of energy sources impossible. The solution they propose is to apply the principles of Degrowth: that is, reduce consumption and production to levels at which resources can be regenerated naturally, while distributing the wealth of rich countries to the rest of the world. This concept should not be confused with that of sustainable development, since the latter believes that it would be possible to continue increasing growth, while protecting the environment. Others are more optimistic and believe that, while local environmental effects can be detected, large-scale ecological effects are minor. Optimists say that if these global ecological changes exist, human ingenuity will find a way to adapt to them.

The pace or type of economic growth can have important consequences for the environment (climate and the natural capital of ecosystems). Concern about the possible negative effects of growth on the environment and society has led certain scientific sectors to defend lower levels of growth, which is where the idea of ​​economic degrowth and green parties come from, which think that national economies are part of a world society and a global ecological system, so they cannot exploit their capacity for natural growth without harming them.

Canadian scientist David Suzuki stated in the 1990s that ecosystems can only support annual growth of between 1.5 and 3% per year, and therefore any attempt to achieve higher yields from agriculture or forests will necessarily end up cannibalizing the natural capital of the soil or forests. There are those who think that this argument can be applied even to the most developed economies. Conventional economists believe that economies advance thanks to technological advances, for example: we now have faster computers than a year ago, but not necessarily a greater number of computers. Perhaps we have gotten rid of physical limitations by betting more on knowledge than on physical production.

On the other hand, it is a historical fact that in the last two centuries economic growth has presented cyclical fluctuations and crises in each and every one of the countries and at the international level. Every economic boom eventually leads to recession and crisis, which ends up opening the conditions for reactivation, which in turn clears the way for a new boom. The economic cycle studied by Clemente Juglar, Karl Marx, Wesley Mitchell, Joseph Schumpeter, Nikolai Kondratieff and other notable economists is a reality to take into account without which any serious estimate of economic growth is impossible.

The economic growth of a country is considered important because it is related to GDP per capita, and this indicator is statistically correlated with the socioeconomic well-being of a country due to the relative abundance of material economic goods available to the citizens of a country for consumption.[6]​.

However, the value of the goods produced or consumed is not necessarily directly related to well-being, for example, we can imagine a society in which tobacco or another drug with negative health effects is produced and that contribute to the GDP with an amount N, and that simultaneously medical treatments are produced that offset the effects by an amount P. Comparing with an economy identical to the previous one but in which neither adverse effects products nor compensatory medical treatment are produced and with GDP Y, the second would have a higher GDP Y + N + P, however, in both societies the general well-being would be the same, since in the second the adverse effects have been compensated by medical treatments.

For a better understanding of economic development as a component of well-being, it is recommended to review the Human Development Index and the Social Progress Index.

Contenido

La variación a corto plazo del crecimiento económico se conoce como ciclo económico, y casi todas las economías viven etapas de recesión de forma periódica. El ciclo puede confundirse puesto que las fluctuaciones no son siempre regulares. La explicación de estas fluctuaciones es una de las tareas principales de la macroeconomía. Hay diferentes escuelas de pensamiento que estudian las causas de las recesiones y las políticas necesarias para salir de ellas (véase keynesianismo, monetarismo, economía neoclásica y neokeynesiana). La variación a corto plazo del crecimiento económico ha sido minimizada en los países de mayores ingresos desde principios de los 90, lo que se atribuye en parte a una mejor gestión macroeconómica.

El estudio del crecimiento económico de largo plazo es un asunto fundamental del estudio de la economía. A pesar de las advertencias enumeradas anteriormente, el aumento del PIB de un país suele considerarse como un aumento en el nivel de vida de sus habitantes. En períodos largos, incluso pequeñas tasas de crecimiento anual pueden tener un efecto significativo debido a su conjugación con otros factores. Una tasa de crecimiento del 2,5% anual conduciría al PIB a duplicarse en un plazo de 30 años, mientras de una tasa de crecimiento del 8% anual (experimentada por algunos países como los cuatro dragones asiáticos) llevaría al mismo fenómeno en un plazo de solo 10 años. Cuando una población aumenta, para ver mejoras en el nivel de vida, el PIB tiene que crecer más rápido que esa población. Este análisis busca entender porque existen tasas muy dispares de crecimiento económico en algunas regiones del mundo.

Historical growth since the 19th century

Until the end of the century there were no sufficiently detailed statistics to calculate economic growth. For the past, A. Maddison (2001) presented estimated calculations that, in line with other sources, show that economic growth during the Middle Ages and up to the century was slow.[7]​ From 1870 until the First World War, growth was very rapid. During World War I, the interwar Great Depression, and World War II, growth slowed somewhat, although it remained high relative to pre-century rates. After the end of the last World War came the golden age of economic growth between 1945 and 1970, with an expansion without parallel in history.[8]​ From 1970 to the present to 2007 it was slower, but still high; This does present an increase in the growth difference between rich countries, which grew somewhat faster, and poor countries. Historically, growth before the century between rich and poor countries had been more balanced.

Sustained economic growth

It is a relatively new concept in human history. The GDP growth for years was very low so it was not taken into consideration by the thinkers of the time. It was not until after 1800 that GDP per capita could change living standards in just one or two generations. Growth rates differ between nations and a variation in it over a period of one year has a great impact on the level of per capita income over a long period.

Income growth can be divided into two main categories: growth from increased income (e.g. capital "Capital (economy)"), labor "Labor (economy)")) and productivity increases (e.g. new technologies). In the long run, technological progress is necessary in order to improve living standards, since it is not possible to increase incomes indefinitely through work, and the attempt to constantly add capital to the production process will necessarily run into decreasing marginal paybacks (see foundations of production theory).

In fact, this is an approximate rule, although numerically very exact, since the number of years required to double income is given by:[9]​.

Exogenous and endogenous models

In the theory of exogenous economic growth, the models of Solow (1956),[10]​ Ramsey (1928),[11]​ Harrod-Domar (1939)[12]​ (1946)[13]​ and Kaldor stand out.[14]​ They are called exogenous because the variable that explains economic growth is taken as "exogenous", that is, as a variable that is not explained by the model.

In the theory of endogenous economic growth, the models of Romer (1986)[15]​ (1990),[16]​ Barro (1990),[17]​ Learning-by-doing (1962),[18]​ Uzawa-Lucas (1965)[19]​ (1988),[20]​ Shumpeter,[21]​ among others stand out. They are called endogenous because the variable that explains economic growth is explained by the model. And thus they offer clearer elements of public policy.

Acemoglu and Robinson

Acemoglu and Robinson (2012) Why do countries fail?[22]​ maintain that above all a country needs political stability to develop economically. Furthermore, Acemoglu and Robinson say that the industrial revolution began in Britain because it was the first country to allow the creative destruction necessary to grow economically on the frontiers of technology. This was guaranteed by their 1689 Bill of Rights, according to Acemoglu and Robinson.

For example, they highlight that Denis Papin built a steamboat in 1705. He sailed down the Fulda River to the city of Münden in Germany, where a boatmen's guild destroyed his boat and steam engine, since they did not want competition. Pepin then went to England, where the Royal Society published several scientific papers he wrote describing his work. Unfortunately, he did not receive any compensation for those documents. He died destitute in London and was buried in an unmarked grave.

Thomas Newcomen built a steam engine using ideas from Pepin and others. Newcomen's machine became a commercial success, pumping water from coal mines that otherwise could not have been worked. Acemoglu and Robinson said the 1689 Bill of Rights allowed creative destruction that had been blocked in Germany.

Neoclassical growth models

Solow's (1956) growth model was the first attempt to analytically guide long-term growth. This model, like other traditional growth models (Cass (1965), Koopmans (1965)), explains differences in per capita income in terms of the accumulation of (physical) capital. In these two models, the differences in the accumulated factor are due to differences in savings rates: for Solow they are determined exogenously, for Ramsey it is determined endogenously through intertemporal utility maximization.

The Solow model predicts convergence toward a steady state; In that steady state, all per capita growth arises from technological progress. Starting from identical factors in terms of institutions (government and central banks), added production functions and savings measures, all countries would tend to converge towards the same steady state. Taking into account that not all countries have the same characteristics, it is possible that not all countries in the world converge due to different levels of steady state. In fact, examining empirical data, convergence is only observable to a limited extent.

Exogenous growth models do not explain the key variable that tells us why economies grow and why they do so at different rates. The theory of endogenous growth tries to "endogenize" the variable of technical progress. And to do so, it resorts to human capital (e.g. education), technological change (e.g. innovation), externalities, etc. North and Thomas (1973)[23]​ maintain that the fundamental explanation for economic growth is institutions.

The Washington consensus and its implications for theory

In the 1990s, John Williamson&action=edit&redlink=1 "John Williamson (economist) (not yet drafted)") published the Washington Consensus, which was suggested to all developing countries to achieve growth.

The World Development Report (1991) argued that the functions of growth - capital accumulation, efficient use of resources, technological progress, and a socially acceptable distribution of income - were best achieved in countries with macroeconomic stability, market distribution of resources, and openness to international trade. A sustained growth policy requires risk reduction, ensuring that serious financial crises do not occur. Finally, governments obviously need to support reforms that eliminate or at least reduce constraints on growth.[24]​.

However, although structural reforms were carried out in many countries (such as Latin America), the expected results were not obtained.[25]​[26]​.

Other explanations

Jevons claimed in the century that economic fluctuations were related to sunspots. Today the theories of economic growth are very diverse and those that seek explanation in institutions stand out. Institutional differences would be explained due to cultural traits, geography, latitude, ideology or historical accidents, etc. Thus, for example, today there are those who highlight that cold countries like Sweden are more economically successful than hot countries like Nigeria. In early stages of human history, economic and cultural development was concentrated in the hot places on Earth, like Egypt. Today, however, the cold states of the North have higher per capita GDP rates than those of the hot states of the Tropics. This aspect of economics (economic geography)--and its influence on human migrations and political structures--was thoroughly studied by Ellsworth Huntington, professor of Economics at Yale University at the beginning of the century.

El crecimiento económico afecta a todas las esferas: social, económica, política... El sistema actual asocia este crecimiento con el progreso y bienestar, relación cuestionada habitualmente por los críticos del capitalismo. En palabras del profesor de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid Carlos Taibo:.

El intento de promover el crecimiento económico por encima de cualquier otra consideración mensurable es un síntoma de lo que se conoce como productivismo, un término que se suele utilizar en tono despectivo.

The limits to growth

The limits to growth debate is about the ecological impact of growth and the creation of wealth and progress. Many of the activities necessary for economic growth make use of non-renewable energy sources. Many researchers believe that these continued environmental effects may in turn have an effect on global ecosystems.

This impact on the environment is what the ecological footprint tries to quantify. Thus, for the year 2005 the number of global hectares (bioproductive hectares) per person was estimated at 2.1. However, for the entire world, consumption stood at 2.7. Therefore, at least for this year (and the trend is increasing, since in 2003 the global ecological footprint was estimated at 2.23), we were over-consuming with respect to the planet's capacity; In other words, we are destroying resources at a speed greater than their natural regeneration rate.

They claim that the cumulative effects on ecosystems impose a theoretical limit on growth. Some turn to archeology to cite examples of cultures that seem to have disappeared because they grew beyond the capacity of their ecosystems to house them, as Duncan claims, for example, will also happen with our civilization (Olduvai Theory). His prediction is that limits to growth could end up making growth based on the consumption of energy sources impossible. The solution they propose is to apply the principles of Degrowth: that is, reduce consumption and production to levels at which resources can be regenerated naturally, while distributing the wealth of rich countries to the rest of the world. This concept should not be confused with that of sustainable development, since the latter believes that it would be possible to continue increasing growth, while protecting the environment. Others are more optimistic and believe that, while local environmental effects can be detected, large-scale ecological effects are minor. Optimists say that if these global ecological changes exist, human ingenuity will find a way to adapt to them.

The pace or type of economic growth can have important consequences for the environment (climate and the natural capital of ecosystems). Concern about the possible negative effects of growth on the environment and society has led certain scientific sectors to defend lower levels of growth, which is where the idea of ​​economic degrowth and green parties come from, which think that national economies are part of a world society and a global ecological system, so they cannot exploit their capacity for natural growth without harming them.

Canadian scientist David Suzuki stated in the 1990s that ecosystems can only support annual growth of between 1.5 and 3% per year, and therefore any attempt to achieve higher yields from agriculture or forests will necessarily end up cannibalizing the natural capital of the soil or forests. There are those who think that this argument can be applied even to the most developed economies. Conventional economists believe that economies advance thanks to technological advances, for example: we now have faster computers than a year ago, but not necessarily a greater number of computers. Perhaps we have gotten rid of physical limitations by betting more on knowledge than on physical production.

On the other hand, it is a historical fact that in the last two centuries economic growth has presented cyclical fluctuations and crises in each and every one of the countries and at the international level. Every economic boom eventually leads to recession and crisis, which ends up opening the conditions for reactivation, which in turn clears the way for a new boom. The economic cycle studied by Clemente Juglar, Karl Marx, Wesley Mitchell, Joseph Schumpeter, Nikolai Kondratieff and other notable economists is a reality to take into account without which any serious estimate of economic growth is impossible.