The productivity convergence debate: a theoretical and methodological reconsideration
指出趋同辩论中忽视了两个基本问题：缺乏解释趋同或趋异的通用模型，以及处理资本数据时的方法论缺陷。通过投入产出方法测量追赶，并以葡萄牙和日本为例说明历史路径依赖导致趋异。
Two fundamental issues which have been ignored in the convergence debate are addressed in this paper. First, there has been little attention paid to the development of a general model which is able to explain convergence or divergence. Second, in the rush to put data to a convergence hypothesis, researchers have failed to consider certain methodological procedures with respect to the treatment of capital. To remedy this problem we use an input-output approach to measure catch-up. To address the theoretical lacunae we present case studies of Portugal and Japan, two countries which by 1959 had attained the threshold level of development required to join the 'convergence club', but which, for various historical (path-dependent) reasons, have diverged rapidly from each other in the period since the late 1950s.