We were wrong about convergence

Several years ago, we celebrated a new era of unconditional convergence of global incomes. Since then, the trend has reversed.

We were wrong about convergence Several years ago, we celebrated a new era of unconditional convergence of global incomes. Since then, the trend has reversed. Justin Sandefur and Arvind Subramanian Dec 12, 2025 1 Share Bob Solow’s original 1956 formulation of the neoclassical growth model predicted that poorer countries would grow faster than rich ones. Capital flows—from rich to poor— would be the great leveler. Three decades later, the advent of the Penn World Tables gave economists access to comparable cross-country data to test that hypothesis rigorously. It proved false. From the 1960s th

saved by

• Katherine Driscoll
• Yudhister Joel Kumar
• Verda Korzeniewski

related reading

• Why poor countries stopped catching updavidoks.blog
• Premature Deindustrializationnber.org
• Economic development is doing OKnoahpinion.substack.com
• Progress Studies reading list — Daniel Maydanielmamay.github.io
• The Long, Slow Death of Global Development - American Affairs Journalamericanaffairsjournal.org
• The age of uncertainty. Liminal timemetapolis.net
• Capital in the 22nd Centuryphiliptrammell.substack.com
• The short history of global living conditions and why it matters that we know it | Our World in Dataourworldindata.org
• How the World Became Richtmychow.com
• oliverwkim.comoliverwkim.com
• Global Developments | Substackglobal-developments.org
• The Solow Model is overrated (for explaining catch-up growth) — Basil Halperinbasilhalperin.com