Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Harvie, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Related Collections
Right arrow C10 - General
Right arrow E11 - Marxian; Sraffian; Institutional; Evolutionary
Right arrow E25 - Aggregate Factor Income Distribution
Right arrow E32 - Business Fluctuations; Cycles
Right arrow J20 - General
Right arrow O47 - Measurement of Economic Growth; Aggregate Productivity; Cross-Country Output Convergence
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Cambridge Journal of Economics 24:349-376 (2000)
Copyright © 2000 Cambridge Political Economy Society

Article

Testing Goodwin: growth cycles in ten OECD countries

D Harvie

Department of Economics and Politics, Nottingham Trent University, Burton Street, Nottingham NG1 4BU, UK
E-mail: david.harvie@ntu.ac.uk

Abstract

Following Desai (Desai, M. 1984. An econometric model of the share of wages in national income: UK 1855-1965, pp. 253-77 in Goodwin, R. M. et al. (eds), Nonlinear Models of Fluctuating Growth, Berlin, Springer), Goodwin's simple 'predator-prey' growth cycle model of the economy (Goodwin, R. M. 1967. A growth cycle, pp. 54-8 in Feinstein, C. H. (ed), Socialism, Capitalism, and Economic Growth, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press; reprinted in Goodwin, R. M. 1982. Essays in Economic Dynamics, Basingstoke, Macmillan, pp. 165-70) is tested, using post-war data for ten OECD countries - Australia, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Norway, the UK and the US. At a quantitative level, Goodwin's model is found not to be adequate: (i) estimated parameter values poorly predict the cycles' centres; and (ii) Goodwin's restrictive assumptions are not justified. However, at a qualitative level, the evidence presented here for the existence of Goodwin-type cycles is extremely encouraging, justifying both existing theoretical extensions of Goodwin's model and further empirical work in this area.

Key Words: Accumulation • Cycles • Employment • Income shares • Marxian economics


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Review of Radical Political EconomicsHome page
L. Aguiar-Conraria
A Note on the Stability Properties of Goodwin's Predator--Prey Model
Review of Radical Political Economics, December 1, 2008; 40(4): 518 - 523.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.