the industry of the main metropolitan area of the country, in fact, uses the infrastructure stock of
whole of Greece.
Table 10 Infrastructure effects on total output: Athens panel for sectors, 1982-1991
Dependent Variable: ln of Total Manufacturing Output (GPV)____________________________________________________
Constant -7.072 (-0.767) |
lnK 0.665 |
lnL 0.781 |
lnEstabl 1.603 (10.383)*** |
lnG(total) 0.363 |
lnG(prod) |
lnG(social |
time |
Adj. |
SSE 7.450 |
SE 0.212 |
-7.326 (-0.874) |
0.665 (4.419)*** |
0.774 (4.892)*** |
1.604 (10.398)*** |
0.382 |
-0.021 (-0.748) |
0.971 |
7.437 |
0.212 | ||
-3.750 (-0.402) |
0.663 (4.394)*** |
0.794 |
1.600 (10.349)*** |
0.231 (0.582) |
-0.008 (-0.273) |
0.971 |
7.476 |
0.212 |
*** Statistically significant at 1% level, ** Statistically significant at 5% level, * Statistically significant at 10% level
The final table of this set (11) presents the results for the panel that refer to a panel of
industrial sectors for the Rest of Greece. The results of this panel appear to determine the respective
findings for the sectoral panel for Greece as whole (table 9). The estimates for private capital are
statistically insignificant in all three types of regression, while the coefficients for labour and
manufacturing establishments are of high magnitude, positive, and significant. The coefficients for
public capital, although positive and significant, are of even higher magnitude than the respective
estimates for Greece as a Whole. Again here, social infrastructure appears to have a bigger impact
than productive public capital.
Table 11 Infrastructure effects on total output: Rest of Greece panel for sectors, 1982-1991
Dependent Variable: ln of Total Manufacturing Output (GPV)___________________________________________________________________________
Constant -5.944 |
lnK 0.013 |
lnL 0.852 |
lnEstabl 0.806 |
lnG(total) 0.797 |
lnG(prod) |
lnG(social |
time |
Adj. |
SSE 2.782 |
SE 0.126 |
-4.232 |
0.013 |
0.852 |
0.806 |
0.738 |
-0.063 |
0.989 |
2.780 |
0.126 | ||
(-0.806) |
(0.136) |
(6.862)*** |
(7.526)*** |
(3.707)*** |
(-3.018)*** | |||||
-9.721 |
0.012 |
0.852 |
0.807 |
1.003 |
-0.059 |
0.989 |
2.786 |
0.126 | ||
(-1.435) |
(0.127) |
(6.845)*** |
(7.533)*** |
(3.653)*** |
(-2.933)*** | |||||
*** Statistically significant at 1% level, ** |
Statistically significant at |
5% level, * |
Statistically significant at 10% level |
Comparing these panels clearly shows that public capital is significant at the regional
(prefectural) level when manufacturing is considered in total. However, while this is also the case for
sectors in Greece nationwide and the nation excluding Athens it is most certainly not the case for the
metropolitan area of Athens. (Some of these issues will be reconsidered in the conclusion to the
thesis.)
4.3 Public capital’s effects on the equilibrium number of manufacturing establishment
Another potential way in which public capital can influence the private economy, in the
context of the model in hand, is its impact on the (equilibrium) number of manufacturing
establishments. The simplest method for the examination of such an effect is via regression. The
24
More intriguing information
1. EFFICIENCY LOSS AND TRADABLE PERMITS2. Contribution of Economics to Design of Sustainable Cattle Breeding Programs in Eastern Africa: A Choice Experiment Approach
3. The name is absent
4. Evolving robust and specialized car racing skills
5. The name is absent
6. INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS AND GROUP PROCESSES
7. Visual Artists Between Cultural Demand and Economic Subsistence. Empirical Findings From Berlin.
8. Determinants of Household Health Expenditure: Case of Urban Orissa
9. HACCP AND MEAT AND POULTRY INSPECTION
10. The name is absent