Search

The work discussed in Bivand and Brunstad (2003 ) was an attempt to throw light on apparent variability in regional convergence in relation to agriculture as a sector subject to powerful political measures, in Western Europe, 1989–1999. The present study takes up a number of points made in conclusion in that paper. Since it is possible that the non-stationarity found there is related to further missing variables, including the inadequacy of the way in which agricultural subsidies are represented, we attempt to replace the agriculture variables with better estimates of producer subsidy equivalents. It is also sensible to check that agricultural support is not masking or masked by other variables, for example human capital. The article is also an account of the development of software contributed to the project ( Development Core Team, 2005 ) as packages, in particular the spdep package for spatial econometrics. New functions generously contributed by researchers will be presented and compared. We find that agricultural support does impact regional economic growth after human capital is taken into consideration, and that we can show that apparent non-stationarity is alleviated by adding these variables.We further find that the moderated remaining spatial autocorrelation can best be represented by a substantive spatial lag model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyses the determinants of regional economic growth in the European Union adopting a non-parametric approach. Although the local-linear kernel estimator applied does not explicitly take into account the spatial dimension of the data, it is found to be consistent in our context. In addition, the geographically weighted regression turns out to be less efficient. We obtain evidence of a non-linear relationship between regional growth and its determinants in the form of parameter heterogeneity and threshold effects. These non-linearities mainly affect the initial productivity of labour, the human capital endowment and, as a novelty, the level of infrastructures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scholars and policymakers interested in the growth and prosperity of regions have long recognized that talent and knowledge are fundamental. Yet the question is what types of talent are needed in a growing twenty-first-century economy: human capital, creativity and innovation, or entrepreneurship? The latter we define broadly to include any type of risk taking, and not only radical innovation. The literature does not clearly point to one factor as being the most essential. This study assesses this question separately for rural and urban United States (US) counties. We find that human capital--measured by educational attainment--is considerably more conducive to employment growth than the share of creative occupations. Likewise, the share of small and medium businesses is also very conducive to local growth, although this does not apply to the self-employment share. Rural and urban areas experience similar patterns, although the magnitude thereof tends to be larger for urban counties, whereas high-technology employment share has had a positive effect in rural areas. Policy conclusions suggest that enhancing small business development and increasing educational attainment are the two strategies that are most likely to succeed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]