Skip to main content

Table 4 Cobb–Douglas production function estimates

From: The rise and fall of Argentina

 With Solow–Swan restriction \(\left( {\alpha = 0} \right)\)Without Solow–Swan restriction \(\left( {\alpha \ne 0} \right)\)
(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)
ln(n + g+δ)− 0.032* (0.019)− 0.040* (0.022)− 0.029 (0.019)− 0.031 (0.023)− 0.040*** (0.017)− 0.037** (0.016)− 0.035** (0.017)− 0.030* (0.016)
ln(k/l)0.722*** (0.023)0.701*** (0.034)0.723*** (0.025)0.704*** (0.039)0.646*** (0.050)0.642*** (0.052)0.646*** (0.052)0.643*** (0.054)
ln(h/l)      0.190** (0.096)0.218** (0.099)
De Jure (latent)0.029*** (0.009)0.033*** (0.009)  0.026*** (0.008)0.028*** (0.008)  
De Facto (latent)  0.002*** (0.0007)0.002*** (0.0008)  0.001** (0.0006)0.002*** (0.0006)
Latent control variablesYesYes (0.719)Yes (0.790)Yes (0.778)Yes (0.951)Yes (0.988)Yes (0.948)Yes (0.981)
Common Technology ShocksNoYes (0.000)NoYes (0.000)No (0.000)Yes (0.000)NoYes (0.000)
# observations16741674167416741674167416741674
R20.930.930.930.930.940.940.940.94
  1. The table presents the augmented Solow growth model with de jure and de facto institutional quality for the period 1950–2012. Standard errors are adjusted for arbitrary heteroskedasticity and serially correlated stochastic disturbances using Huber–White sandwich estimator, and are denoted in the parentheses. Asterisks denote statistically significant coefficients at 10% (*), 5% (**), and 1% (***), respectively