What have we learned from a decade of empirical research on growth? Comment on "Growth Empirics and Reality," by William A. Brock and Steven N. Durlauf
评论布洛克和杜尔劳夫的文章，指出增长回归对实践者帮助有限，建议从模型检验转向决策理论方法，并讨论了学术与实践者的利益冲突、产出异质性及政策指导的局限性。
World Bank economists are mostly practical people—people who try to answer the question, “What exactly should this particular country do right now?” But if they had hoped that the growth regression lessons summarized in William Brock and Steven Durlauf's article would enhance their practical advice giving, they might feel some dissatisfaction. How would they change their advice to, say, Brazil? But that is why this article is important conceptually. It goes to the heart of the matter by proposing a change in the empirical growth literature's fundamental methodology—from model testing to decision theoretic. The article's valiant but flawed attempt reveals the difficulties in making this shift, however. I'd like to make three points: There is a tension between the interests of academics and practitioners in growth regressions. Output response heterogeneity is a huge practical problem. And policy decisions can be guided only in broad outlines by growth regressions.