• International Area Studies Review
• /
• v.12 no.3
• /
• pp.153-169
• /
• 2008

This paper examines the recently empirical test for the two types of endogenous growth models, which one is more fitted to real data. We adopt the non-stationary panel data methodologies for seeking empirical implication by using productivity and R&D data in the OECD over the past two decades. The Empirical tests show that there is a robust relationship Total Factor Productivity and R&D variables implied by semi-endogenous growth model. The relationship suggested by fully endogenous growth theory, however, is sensitive to R&D variables. Therefore, the estimation results provide empirical evidence in favour of endogenous growth theory of R&D expenditure role for sustaining economic growth. The sustained Total Factor Productivity, however, is maintained by more increasing R&D inputs for overcoming diminishing return to R&D efforts.

• International Area Studies Review
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.147-165
• /
• 2016

We empirically examine the validity of second generation endogenous growth theory suing 21 OECD countries' panel data(1981~2011). Due to non-stationarity in all variables, we test the cointegrated relationships strongly supporting the semi-endogenous growth model. In the estimation of total factor productivity growth function, the growth of domestic and foreign R&D investment levels statistically significantly affect total factor productivity growth. R&D intensity, however, has significant impacts on the total factor productivity growth only in a few models, and international technology gap also has positive impacts on GDP growth. Thus the semi-endogenous growth model is relatively supported while fully endogenous growth model is weakly and occasionally supported in OECD countries. The policy implication of supporting the semi-endogenous growth model is that the sustaining growth requires increasing R&D expenditures.