Abstract
ABSTRACTArvind Subramanian argues indicators like growth in export, import and private credit predict India’s growth before 2011 but fail to do so after the 2011 change in GDP estimation methodology, implying growth was overestimated post 2011. We find, however, these indicators underestimate growth before 2011 too, and also either overestimate or underestimate growth in a large number of countries. His empirical design is therefore flawed. His regressions cannot be used for predicting growth or for concluding growth is overestimated or for pointing to problems in the GDP estimation methodology. His subsequent more heuristic defence against widespread criticisms is also flawed.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Macroeconomics and Finance in Emerging Market Economies
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
