Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. Mendelianae Brun. 2012, 60(4), 37-46 | DOI: 10.11118/actaun201260040037

Regional disparities and convergences in America

Petr Blíľkovský
Director of Economic and Regional Affairs, General Secretariat of the Council of the European Union, Rue de la Loi 148, 1048 Brussels, Belgium

This paper analyses the levels and trends of regional disparity and convergence in the two American macro-regions, NAFTA and MERCOSUR. In the case of NAFTA, 95 micro-regions were analysed (12 in Canada; 32 in Mexico; 51 states in the US). In MERCOSUR, the regions are represented by four countries (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay). The analysis covers the period 2000-2008 (or rather 2000 to 2005 for Mexico).
The regional disparities were calculated with the Gini coefficient based on nominal GDP, GDP per capita and GDP per capita PPS. Convergence analysis was done with the Disparity Range Coefficient (DRC), the Average Disparity Range Coefficient (ADRC), σ-convergence and β-convergence.
The results of regional disparity were as follows. Based on the nominal GDP, it was at high levels in both macro-regions, with a Gini coefficient above 0.55. With the disparities calculated on GDP per capita, the level of regional disparity in both macro-regions was lower at 0.36 in NAFTA and 0.28 in MERCOSUR in 2000. Based on GDP per capita in PPP, the levels were lower than based on the GDP per capita analysis starting at 0.31 in NAFTA and 0.16 in MERCOSUR. The disparities further decreased by half in NAFTA while slightly increasing in MERSCOSUR.
The convergence analysis results based on the DRC analysis showed that neither NAFTA nor MERCOSUR regions converged. The speed of divergence varied significantly. The disparities among the richest and poorest regions in GDP per capita increased 6.26 times more than the average GDP per capita in PPP in NAFTA as a whole. It was only 0.52 in MERCOSUR. The ADRC analysis also resulted in divergence trends for both macro-regions but with lower rates. Convergence calculated with the σ-convergence analysis confirmed that both macro-regions diverged. The divergence rate for NAFTA was 1.41% and for MERCOSUR 0.74. Calculated with the β-convergence analysis, the NAFTA region showed a status quo (convergence of 0.01%) and a divergence trend was registered for MERCOSUR (0.99%). At the country level, the micro-regions in Canada were diverging (1.62% per year) while the ones in the US and Mexico converging (0.02% and 0.77%, respectively).

Keywords: disparity, convergence, regions, NAFTA, MERCOSUR

Received: January 10, 2012; Published: August 7, 2013  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Blíľkovský, P. (2012). Regional disparities and convergences in America. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis60(4), 37-46. doi: 10.11118/actaun201260040037
Download citation

References

  1. BLÍ®KOVSKÝ, P., 2011a: Regional Disparities and Convergences in the European Union (in preparation), Acta universitatis agriculturae et silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Brno.
  2. BLÍ®KOVSKÝ, P., 2011b: Regional Disparities and Convergences in Asia (in preparation), Acta universitatis agriculturae et silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Brno.
  3. DUFEK, J., MINAŘÍK, B., 2009: Analýza indikátorů pro hodnocení cílů realizace strategie regionálního rozvoje v České republice. Brno, ISBN 978-80-7375-366-5.
  4. IMF, 2008: Word economic outlook April 2008: Housing and the Business Cycle. ISBN 978-1-58906-719-6.
  5. IRADIAN, G., 2005: Inequality, Poverty, and Growth: Cross-Country Evidence. International Monetary Fund, WP/05/28 Go to original source...
  6. KAUFMAN, M., SWAGEL, P., DUNAWAY, S., 2003: Regional Convergence and the Role of Federal Transfers in Canada. International Monetary Fund, WP/03/97. Go to original source...
  7. OECD, 2009: How Regions Grow. Policy Brief. Observer OECD, Paris. Go to original source...
  8. SALA-I-MARTIN, X., 1995: The Classical Approach to Convergence Analysis. Yale University and Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Economics Working Paper 117.
  9. SALA-I-MARTIN, X., 2002: 15 Years of New Growth Economics: What Have We Learnt? Columbia University and Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
  10. SALA-I-MARTIN, X., 2006: The World Distribution of Income: Falling Poverty and Convergence Period. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. CXXI, Issue 2. Go to original source...
  11. SERRA, M. I., PAZIMO, M. F., LINDOW, G., SUTTON, B., RAMIREZ, G., 2006: Regional Convergence in Latin America and Mexico. International Monetary Fund, WP/06/125. Go to original source...
  12. SUMMERS, R., 1995: The World Distribution of Income: Growth and Inequality. U.S.: University of Pennsylvania.
  13. UNDP, 2001: Human Development Report 200. USA: United Nations Development Programme.
  14. UNEL, B., ZEBREGS, H., 2006: The Dynamics of Provincial Growth in China: A Nonparametric Approach. International Monetary Fund, WP/06/55. Go to original source...
  15. ®IVĚLOVÁ, I., PALÁT, M., 2008: Analýza disparit v kvalitě ľivota mezi okresy Jihomoravského kraje. In: Medzinárodné vedecké dni. Nitra: SPU Nitra, pp. 1451-1460. ISBN 978-80-552-0061-3.

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY NC ND 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.