Thursday, April 18, 2013

More data related posts

Jayati Ghosh in 'Country Income Shares in PPP': "...suggests that just three countries (Brazil, China and India) together account for around 30 per cent of global GDP already, around the same as the total share of large Northern countries (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, the UK and the US).
If this were an accurate representation  of reality it would mark a truly astounding change over the past three decades. but since the output of different countries is measured in terms of 1990 PPP dollars, rather than nominal exchange rates, this greatly exaggerates the extent of change. With nominal exchange rates, the rising trend share of these countries is still evident but not so marked: the GDP of these three countries in 2011 accounted for just above 16 per cent of world GDP according to IMF, (around half of the ratio estimated by the HDR) and their share of total merchandise exports is just above 13 per cent according to the WTO."

Catherine Rampell in A history of oopsies in economic studies " response to controversies over mistakes, coding disputes and academics under siege who are protective of their data, some top journals like The American Economic Review now require authors to submit data and code “sufficient to permit replication” when sending in a paper. Sometimes the underlying numbers and code must be made publicly available. But there are exceptions, as sometimes the data are proprietary or very sensitive. Researchers have to get special permission to use the highly coveted Social Security records data, for example, and have to agree not to share the numbers with unauthorized parties."

Felix Salmon explains Arindrajit Dube's analysis of the famous Rienhart-Rogoff paper "In other words, the causation here seems about as clear as causal analysis can ever be: low growth causes high debt, rather than high debt causing low growth. Indeed, once you get past 90% of GDP, your debt load doesn’t seem to have any significant effect on future growth at all!" 

Dean Baker In History of Economic errors, Martin Feldstein deserves a mention

No comments: