Truth and robustness in cross-country growth regressions
Abstract
We re-examine studies of cross-country growth regressions by Levine and Renelt (American
Economic Review, Vol. 82, 1992, pp. 942-963) and Sala-i-Martin (American Economic
Review, Vol. 87, 1997a, pp. 178-183; Economics Department, Columbia, University, 1997b).
In a realistic Monte Carlo experiment, their variants of Edward Leamer's extreme-bounds
analysis are compared with a cross-sectional version of the general-to-specific search
methodology associated with the LSE approach to econometrics. Levine and Renelt's
method has low size and low power, while Sala-i-Martin's method has high size and
high power. The general-to-specific methodology is shown to have a near nominal size
and high power. Sala-i-Martin's method and the general-to-specific method are then
applied to the actual data from Sala-i-Martin's original study.
Type
Journal articlePermalink
https://hdl.handle.net/10161/2079Collections
More Info
Show full item recordScholars@Duke
Kevin Douglas Hoover
Professor of Economics
Professor Hoover's research interests include macroeconomics, monetary economics,
the history of economics, and the philosophy and methodology of empirical economics.
His recent work in economics has focused on the application of causal search methodologies
for structural vector autoregression, the history of microfoundational programs in
macroeconomics, and Roy Harrod's early work on dynamic macroeconomics. In philosophy,
he has concentrated on issues related to causality, especially in economi

Articles written by Duke faculty are made available through the campus open access policy. For more information see: Duke Open Access Policy
Rights for Collection: Scholarly Articles
Works are deposited here by their authors, and represent their research and opinions, not that of Duke University. Some materials and descriptions may include offensive content. More info