Human capital contributions to explain productivity differences

Chatzimichael, Konstantinos; Tzouvelekas, Vangelis

doi:10.1007/s11123-013-0355-x

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the purposes of this paper we approach productivity from a more comprehensive perspective, encompassing distributional implications, human development and the capacity of the country to provide for its citizens and also to absorb the results and/of effects of all the production processes. Similar studies have been conducted by Aoyama et al (2010), Badinger (2008), Becchetti et al (2013), Chatzimichael and Tzouvelekas (2013), Fulginiti and Perrin (2005), Ilmakkunas and Piekkola (2014), Restuccia and Rogerson (2013), Rios-Rull and Santaeulalia-Llopis (2010), etc.…”

Section: Literature Reviewsupporting

confidence: 79%

Callisthenic Productivity. A Challenge for the Traditional Economic Productivity Indicators

Mihai

2021

LUMEN EAS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Measuring economic productivity is a challenging task, mainly because we cannot isolate completely the effects produced by individual inputs, nor can we measure precisely how their interaction affects the overall result. In this paper we will test a new way of measuring economic productivity at country level that takes into account also the social dimension and the sustainability over time - we call it callisthenic productivity. The indicator has been built by measuring economic productivity as a sum of labor and capital productivity, which afterwards we adjust by using the Gini coefficient, the human development index, the biocapacity and the ecologic footprint of consumption. The end result is not necessarily a better way to represent a country’s productivity, but rather a better way to compare the ability of countries to generate effective, reliable and sustainable economic productivity.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewsupporting

confidence: 79%

Callisthenic Productivity. A Challenge for the Traditional Economic Productivity Indicators

Mihai

2021

LUMEN EAS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similar studies have been conducted by Fulginiti and Perrin (2005), Badinger (2008), Rios-Rull and Santaeulalia-Llopis (2010), Aoyama, Yoshikawa, Iyetomi and Fujiwara (2010), Restuccia and Rogerson (2013), Chatzimichael and Tzouvelekas (2013), Becchetti, Castriota and Tortia (2013), Ilmakkunas and Piekkola (2014) etc.…”

Section: Introduction and Literature Reviewsupporting

confidence: 82%

Economic Productivity Flip-Flop in the Danube Countries

Mihai

2015

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Productivity emphasizes the strength and vigor of an economy, but could we use it to capture the strength and vigor of the society within which the economic processes take place? This paper analyzes economic productivity in relation with its social dimension. The research hypothesis on which the paper is built is that measuring economic productivity reveals the economic results, but hides the social effects. In order to test the hypothesis we start by computing the capital and labor productivity of the selected countries, scores which in a subsequent stage are summed up in order to establish the total productivity. Further in our analysis we adjust the level of productivity through three equations meant to reflect the fairness of the income distribution, the level of human development and also the sustainability of the economic processes that generate the computed levels of productivity. The paper uses the methodology developed by the author in a previous study. The countries chosen for the empirical analysis are the Danube countries

show abstract

“…Thus the human capital can be treated as a fundamental source of economic growth, where the human ingenuity can increase the factor's productivity, supported by technological advancement or by better use of existing technology (Barro, 1991;Lucas, 1988;Mankiw, Romer, & Weil, 1992;Romer, 1986Romer, , 1990. In fact, it is the difference in the rate of progress of human capital, which largely contributes to the growth differentials between developed and developing nations (Chatzimichael & Tzouvelekas, 2014). The same is evident from the Human Capital Index (HCI) released by the World Bank as part of the World Development Report-2019.While most developed countries like Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Australia, etc.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The state of human capital for Indian states: An empirical evidence from health and education performance

Mehra

Dogga

Kuruva³

2022

ijhs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using composite index method, the present study attempts to construct Human Capital Index (HCI) for Indian states by multiplying the contributions of three major components- survival, health, and education. The study reveals that Kerala, Goa, and Chandigarh occupy the top three ranks. In contrast, the other states, like Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, and Madhya Pradesh occupied the bottom three positions. The study has key policy implications and calls for a Human Capital centric approach towards economic growth, which will help India build the edifice of its growth story, on the strong foundations of productive human capital

show abstract

Human capital contributions to explain productivity differences

Cited by 6 publications

References 33 publications

Callisthenic Productivity. A Challenge for the Traditional Economic Productivity Indicators

Callisthenic Productivity. A Challenge for the Traditional Economic Productivity Indicators

Economic Productivity Flip-Flop in the Danube Countries

The state of human capital for Indian states: An empirical evidence from health and education performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About