Exports and long-run growth: The case of Spain, 1850-2020

Figures & data

Figure 1. Real GDP per capita: Spain and several European countries, 1850–2018.

(2011 US$, 2011 benchmark)Source: Maddison Project Database, version 2020 (Bolt and van Zanden, 2020).

Figure 2. Evolution of Spanish exports, 1850–2020.

(million €, 2010 prices) Source: Prados de la Escosura (2017).

Table 1. Cumulative growth rates of GDP and exports: Spain, 1850–2020(percentage points).

	GDP	Exports
1850–1900	1.34	3.68
1901–1950	1.18	−0.92
1951–2020	3.56	5.97
1850–2020	2.30	3.53

Source: Own elaboration from Prados de la Escosura (2017).

Table 2. Ng-Perron tests for unit roots.

	MZα	MZt	MSB	MPT
$\frac{\dot{Y}}{\mathit{Y}}$	−81.04^a	−6.365^a	0.079^a	0.302^a
$\frac{\mathit{I}}{\mathit{Y}}$	−21.96^b	−3.283^b	0.149^b	4.341^b
$\frac{\stackrel{.}{\mathit{L}1}}{\mathit{L}1}$	−60.83^a	−5.490^a	0.090^a	0.462^a
$\frac{\stackrel{.}{\mathit{L}2}}{\mathit{L}2}$	−44.27^a	−4.693^a	0.106^a	0.586^a
$\left(\frac{X}{Y}\frac{\dot{X}}{\mathit{X}}\right)$	−82.41^a	−6.415^a	0.078^a	1.122^a
$\frac{\dot{X}}{\mathit{X}}$	−10.48^b	−2.279^b	0.217^b	2.379^b

Note: ^a and ^b denote significance at the 1% and 5% levels, respectively. The critical values are taken from Ng and Perron (2001, Table I).

Table 3. Estimation of growth equations, 1850–2020(dependent variable: $\dot{Y}/\mathit{Y}$).

	Eq. (5)		Eq. (5’)		Eq. (5”)
constant	0.367 (0.496)	0.381 (0.520)	0.180 (0.246)	0.191 (0.263)	0.495 (0.650)	0.513 (0.680)
$\frac{\mathit{I}}{\mathit{Y}}$	0.101^b (2.092)	0.117^b (2.282)	0.123^a (2.716)	0.139^a (2.871)	0.091^c (1.847)	0.105^b (2.029)
$\left(\frac{\dot{L}}{\mathit{L}}\right)$	0.633^a (3.770)	0.492^a (2.999)	0.634^a (4.002)	0.500^a (3.251)	0.619^a (3.671)	0.482^a (2.997)
$\left(\frac{X}{Y}\frac{\dot{X}}{\mathit{X}}\right)$	0.004 (1.527)	0.004 (1.498)	−0.007^b (−2.427)	−0.007^b (−2.450)	0.007^b (1.986)	0.007^b (2.013)
$\frac{\dot{X}}{\mathit{X}}$	-	-	0.124^a (3.540)	0.125^a (3.667)	-	-
${\left(\frac{X}{Y}\frac{\dot{X}}{\mathit{X}}\right)}^2$	-	-	-	-	−5.34∙10^−6c (−1.855)	−5.54∙10^−6c (−1.917)
R^2	0.111	0.100	0.159	0.149	0.120	0.110
σ	4.553	4.580	4.443	4.468	4.544	4.569
B-G(1)	1.746	1.898	0.985	1.021	2.268	2.472
B-G(4)	2.129	2.106	3.118	2.355	2.823	2.777
B-P	4.946	4.671	5.521	5.315	5.040	4.801
ARCH(1)	0.741	0.792	0.855	0.904	0.588	0.644
ARCH(4)	3.882	3.059	5.368	4.530	3.428	2.706
RESET(1)	1.604	2.919^c	0.529	0.263	0.303	0.878

Note: t-statistics in parentheses; ^{a, b} and ^c denote significance at the 1%, 5% and 10% levels, respectively.

Table 4. Contributions to economic growth, 1850–2020(percentage points).

Variable	with employment	with hours worked
Investment	1.695	1.911
Labour growth	0.475	0.223
Exports	0.162	0.157
Externalities	−7.560	−7.635
Higher productivity	7.721	7.792
Total	2.332	2.291
GDP growth	2.556	2.556

Source: Own elaboration from Table 3 and Prados de la Escosura (2017).

Table 5. Bai-Perron tests for structural change.

Tests	Eq. (5)		Eq. (5’)		Eq. (5”)
UDmax	38.04	49.76	42.64	58.00	40.10	58.21
WDmax	55.29	72.34	42.64	82.27	56.89	82.57
scaled F(1)	19.60	19.19	42.64	40.50	38.12	46.41
scaled F(2)	12.43	29.95	23.31	30.35	20.25	43.15
scaled F(3)	38.04	49.76	28.68	58.00	40.10	58.21
scaled F(1|0)	19.60	19.19	42.64	40.50	38.12	46.41
scaled F(2|1)	4.139*	39.86	3.606*	16.42*	4.211*	24.63
scaled F(3|2)	-	5.387*	-	-	-	4.612*
Number of breaks selected	1	2	1	1	1	2

Note: All the test statistics are significant at the 5% level, except those denoted with *. The critical values are taken from Bai and Perron (2003b).

Table 6. Estimation of growth equations, 1850–1895 and 1896–2020(dependent variable: $\frac{\dot{Y}}{\mathit{Y}}$).

	Eq. (5)		Eq. (5’)		Eq. (5”)
(A) 1850–1895
constant	−2.165 (−0.934)	−2.219 (−0.991)	−2.010 (−0.905)	−2.237 (−1.035)	−2.345 (−1.043)	−2.417 (−1.118)
$\frac{\mathit{I}}{\mathit{Y}}$	0.360 (0.896)	0.421 (1.335)	0.245 (0.629)	0.398 (1.329)	0.314 (0.844)	0.395 (1.363)
$\left(\frac{\dot{L}}{\mathit{L}}\right)$	1.165 (0.676)	0.555 (0.707)	1.862 (1.126)	0.414 (0.534)	1.445 (0.922)	0.646 (0.837)
$\left(\frac{X}{Y}\frac{\dot{X}}{\mathit{X}}\right)$	0.026^a (4.510)	0.025^a (4.709)	0.065^a (5.098)	0.059^a (5.007)	0.020^c (1.914)	0.019^c (2.001)
$\frac{\dot{X}}{\mathit{X}}$	-	-	−0.259^a (−3.659)	−0.221^a (−3.290)	-	-
${\left(\frac{X}{Y}\frac{\dot{X}}{\mathit{X}}\right)}^2$	-	-	-	-	4.71∙10^−5 (1.154)	4.57∙10^−5 (1.153)
R^2	0.284	0.285	0.337	0.325	0.305	0.304
σ	4.469	4.467	4.354	4.395	4.459	4.461
B-G(1)	1.113	0.957	1.389	1.438	0.963	0.799
B-G(4)	5.276	4.464	6.452	5.367	5.760	4.742
B-P	3.458	2.199	3.549	2.455	3.974	2.717
ARCH(1)	0.005	0.000	0.005	0.017	0.020	0.001
ARCH(4)	8.485^c	8.501^c	9.049^c	9.239^c	8.449^c	8.325^c
RESET (1)	0.507	0.415	0.022	0.056	2.132	2.411
(B) 1896–2020
constant	0.257 (0.215)	0.315 (0.267)	0.307 (0.276)	0.365 (0.332)	0.383 (0.317)	0.464 (0.388)
$\frac{\mathit{I}}{\mathit{Y}}$	0.120^c (1.972)	0.134^b (2.112)	0.125^b (2.171)	0.138^b (2.309)	0.112^c (1.780)	0.123^c (1.879)
$\frac{\dot{L}}{\mathit{L}}$	0.611^a (3.628)	0.447^a (2.781)	0.619^a (3.810)	0.464^a (2.972)	0.605^a (3.599)	0.445^a (2.803)
$\left(\frac{X}{Y}\frac{\dot{X}}{\mathit{X}}\right)$	0.001 (0.704)	0.001 (0.683)	−0.008^a (−2.788)	−0.008^a (−2.787)	0.003 (0.843)	0.003 (0.884)
$\frac{\dot{X}}{\mathit{X}}$	-	-	0.113^a (3.007)	0.115^a (3.103)	-	-
${\left(\frac{X}{Y}\frac{\dot{X}}{\mathit{X}}\right)}^2$	-	-	-	-	−2.09∙10^−6 (−0.829)	−2.49∙10^−6 (−0.910)
R^2	0.109	0.088	0.152	0.133	0.111	0.091
σ	4.425	4.477	4.335	4.385	4.439	4.489
B-G(1)	1.874	2.110	0.733	0.840	1.993	2.274
B-G(4)	2.901	3.298	1.682	1.476	3.006	3.430
B-P	4.822	4.721	5.305	5.225	5.041	4.906
ARCH(1)	0.621	0.763	0.767	0.897	0.618	0.759
ARCH(4)	2.962	2.350	3.282	2.665	2.789	2.202
RESET(1)	0.511	0.649	0.418	0.168	0.370	0.524

Note: See Table 3

Table 7. Contributions to economic growth, 1850–1895 and 1896–2020(percentage points).

Variable	with employment	with hours worked
(A) 1850–1895
Investment	1.459	2.372
Labour growth	0.727	0.138
Exports	1.244	1.194
Externalities	8.754	7.464
Higher productivity	−7.510	−6.271
Total	3.430	3.705
GDP growth	1.483	1.483
(B) 1896–2020
Investment	2.067	2.291
Labour growth	0.526	0.203
Exports	−0.026	−0.027
Externalities	−8.018	−8.147
Higher productivity	7.992	8.120
Total	2.567	2.467
GDP growth	3.220	3.220

Source: Own elaboration from Table 6 and Prados de la Escosura (2017).

Figure 3. Recursive estimates of the coefficients on the effect of exports.

Table 8. Granger-causality tests.

	1850–2020		1850–1895		1896–2020
Null hypothesis	F-statistic	Probability	F-statistic	Probability	F-statistic	Probability
(A) Between $\frac{\dot{\mathit{Y}}}{\mathit{Y}}$ and $\frac{\dot{\mathit{X}}}{\mathit{X}}$
$\frac{\dot{X}}{\mathit{X}}$ does not Granger-cause $\frac{\dot{Y}}{\mathit{Y}}$	2.083	0.086	0.928	0.460	2.606	0.039
$\frac{\dot{Y}}{\mathit{Y}}$ does not Granger-cause $\frac{\dot{X}}{\mathit{X}}$	0.755	0.556	0.823	0.520	1.409	0.235
(B) Between $\frac{\dot{\mathit{Y}}}{\mathit{Y}}$ and $\left(\mathbf{1}\mathbf{-}\frac{\mathit{X}}{\mathit{Y}}\right)\frac{\dot{\mathit{X}}}{\mathit{X}}$
$\left(1-\frac{X}{Y}\right)\frac{\dot{X}}{\mathit{X}}$ does not Granger-cause $\frac{\dot{Y}}{\mathit{Y}}$	1.664	0.161	1.442	0.243	1.539	0.195
$\frac{\dot{Y}}{\mathit{Y}}$ does not Granger-cause $\left(\mathbf{1}\mathbf{-}\frac{\mathit{X}}{\mathit{Y}}\right)\frac{\dot{\mathit{X}}}{\mathit{X}}$	0.509	0.729	1.030	0.407	0.694	0.597
(C) Between $\frac{\dot{\mathit{Y}}}{\mathit{Y}}$ and $\left(\frac{\mathit{X}}{\mathit{Y}}\frac{\dot{\mathit{X}}}{\mathit{X}}\right)$
$\left(\frac{X}{Y}\frac{\dot{X}}{\mathit{X}}\right)$ does not Granger-cause $\frac{\dot{Y}}{\mathit{Y}}$	1.774	0.137	1.343	0.276	1.663	0.163
$\frac{\dot{Y}}{\mathit{Y}}$ does not Granger-cause $\left(\frac{X}{Y}\frac{\dot{X}}{\mathit{X}}\right)$	0.440	0.779	1.012	0.416	0.664	0.618

Bolt, J., & van Zanden, J. L. (2020): “Maddison style estimates of the evolution of the world economy: A new 2020 update”, Maddison-Project Working Paper WP-15, University of Groningen, Groningen.

 Google Scholar

Prados de la Escosura, L. (2017): Spanish Economic Growth, 1850-2015, Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://www.palgrave.com/la/book/9783319580418.

 Google Scholar

Ng, S., & Perron, P. (2001). Lag length selection and the construction of unit root tests with good size and power. Econometrica, 69(6), 1519–1554.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Bai, J., & Perron, P. (2003b). Critical values for multiple structural change tests. Econometrics Journal, 6(1), 72–78.

 Google Scholar