Do growth-promoting factors induce income inequality in a transitioning large developing economy? An empirical evidence from Indian states

Abstract

We examine the role of the enforcement of property rights, human capital formation, and the efficiency of various components of state governments' developmental expenditure on states’ economic growth and interstate income inequality. Together with private sector investment in rural areas, property rights enforcement, human capital, government expenditures on economic services, and health and education are found to have positive effects on states’ growth. We also observe that the interstate difference in the provisioning of government economic services is the leading factor in contributing to interstate income divergence in India. These findings can serve as vital technical inputs for formulating economic policies to achieve faster economic growth and mitigate regional income inequality in transitioning developing economies like India and hold greater relevance for other developing economies on their way to experiencing similar social and economic transitions.

Does China’s green economic recovery generate a spatial convergence trend: an explanation using agglomeration effects and fiscal instruments

“…Their findings all suggest the existence of conditional convergence or spatial club convergence in China, but do not support the existence of absolute convergence. Following the significant impact on global economic growth of the outbreak of COVID-19 in 2020 (Nandan and Mallick 2021 ), scholars have initiated a new discussion on the spatial convergence of economic growth. Wang et al ( 2020 ) established a spatial Durbin model to empirically test the spatial convergence of economic growth between provinces in China.…”

Poverty, ICT and Economic Growth in SADC Region: A Panel Cointegration Evaluation

“…Cross-sectional dependence: In panel data analysis, the usual assumption is that disturbances in panel models are cross-sectionally independent, especially when a large cross-section (N) is involved [55]. Meanwhile, in reality, the cross-sectional dependence in panel analysis appears to be the rule of the game, thus it cannot be underestimated [57,58]. Therefore, assuming cross-section independence may pose serious problems that may result in estimator inefficiency and invalid test estimates.…”