Economic growth and club convergence: Is there a neighbour's effect?

Abstract

The study investigates economic growth and club convergence in a crosscountry framework from 1970-1971 to 2014-2015. In particular, we test the club convergence hypothesis through a non-parametric and spatial interaction setting. The kernel density estimate shows a cyclical behaviour of per capita incomes, albeit following a common steady state. The conditional distribution is concentrated around the mean indicating a similar relative position across the heterogeneous countries. The transitional probabilities are strong enough to demonstrate a significant sign of clubbing. On testing the convergence hypothesis, we perceive strong evidence of club convergence across the countries. A persistent spatial dependence is unveiled across the proximities, therefore confirming the neighbour's effects in club formation. The study realizes a need to harmonize the interaction between the countries to improve the conditions for achieving long-run sustained economic growth.

Convergence analysis of artificial intelligence research capacity: Are the less developed catching up with the developed ones?

“…Table 6 illustrates the initial club classification and merging clubs in AI research impact. From the table, there is significant club convergence in only Club 2, whereas Clubs 1, 3 and 4 reject the null hypothesis of convergence; thus, diverging since it has been viewed that if the coefficient ( β ) is significant and positive, it means there is evidence of convergence for the club classification; otherwise, there is not (Li et al, 2018; Sofi et al, 2023); hence, divergence. This is evident that the countries in Club 2 converged into similar paths, while those in Clubs 1, 3 and 4 are not.…”

“…However, caution is advised as this method might sometimes overestimate the number of distinct clubs (Saba & Ngepah, 2023). convergence for the club classification; otherwise, there is not (Li et al, 2018;Sofi et al, 2023); hence, divergence. This is evident that the countries in Club 2 converged into similar paths, while those in Clubs 1, 3 and 4 are not.…”

“…However, we cannot completely depend on this approach because it could often overestimate the number of clubs (Saba & Ngepah, 2023). Therefore, the study proceeds to execute the Phillips and Sul (2009) (Li et al, 2018;Sofi et al, 2023), indicating divergence. This is evident that the countries in Clubs 1 and 3 converged into similar paths, while countries in Clubs 2, 4, 5 and 6 are not.…”

“…This is determined by whether the coefficient ( β ) is significant and positive; if so, convergence is supported for that club classification. If not, the convergence hypothesis is rejected, suggesting divergence (Li et al, 2018; Sofi et al, 2023). Therefore, it is clear that countries in Club 1 are following similar paths of convergence, in contrast to countries in Clubs 2–6, which are not converging.…”

“…If the coefficient is significant and positive, there is clear evidence of convergence for the club classification. Conversely, if it is not, the convergence process is rejected (Li et al, 2018; Sofi et al, 2023), indicating divergence. This is evident that the countries in Clubs 1 and 3 converged into similar paths, while countries in Clubs 2, 4, 5 and 6 are not.…”