BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//jEvents 2.0 for Joomla//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
BEGIN:VEVENT
UID:b3b4b00100c2dd1bcc140d1e174c781a
CATEGORIES:Seminars
CREATED:20190121T104343
SUMMARY:Lunch Seminar: Robert S. Chirinko - University of Illinois at Chicago
DESCRIPTION;ENCODING=QUOTED-PRINTABLE:<p><strong><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif
 ';">International Capital Allocations: The Lucas Paradox and other Puzzles 
 </span></strong><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: 'Calibri','sans-
 serif';">with Debdulal Mallick</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><s
 pan style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif';">Abstract:
 </span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; fo
 nt-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif';">"Why Doesn’t Capital Flow from Rich to 
 Poor Countries?” This provocative question posed by Lucas in 1990 initiated
  a line of research focusing on the substantial differences in the marginal
  product of private capital (MPK) across countries. Large and sustained dif
 ferences in MPKs between poor and rich countries define the Lucas Paradox, 
 which is sharply at odds with capital’s pursuit of profitable investment op
 portunities and diminishing returns to capital accumulation that are at the
  core of the neoclassical framework. Subsequent studies with improved measu
 rement have largely resolved the Lucas Paradox. This paper re-examines this
  evidence with new data, enhanced measurement, and a more nuanced definitio
 n of convergence. We begin by showing that the Lucas Paradox has reemerged 
 with the most recently available data. Moreover, the difference between the
  MPK’s for rich and poor countries is widened when adjustments are made for
  the shadow economy and government capital. A new puzzle emerges, as there 
 is a clear structural break in 1990, after which the MPK’s for both rich an
 d poor countries rise. Such an increase is at odds with the global saving g
 lut and secular stagnation. We then argue, however, that a comparison of av
 erage MPK’s is not appropriate for evaluating the efficiency of internation
 al capital allocations because they are sensitive to transition dynamics an
 d country-specific steady-states. These problems are addressed in a partial
  adjustment model. Conditional on these steady-states, international capita
 l allocations are reassessed. The steady-state MPK’s are related to institu
 tional infrastructure and finance constraints. Counterfactual exercises gau
 ge the impact of international capital misallocations on world output.</spa
 n></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-fa
 mily: 'Calibri','sans-serif';"></span></p>
DTSTAMP:20260403T183732Z
DTSTART:20190417T130000Z
DTEND:20190417T140000Z
SEQUENCE:0
TRANSP:OPAQUE
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR