Grey Incidence Relation Analysis and Granger Causality Tests of the Income Level and Economic Growth – Case Study on Gansu Province, China

Bing XUE, Xingpeng CHEN, Weiwei ZHANG, Jing WANG, Xiaojia GUO, Yong GENG

.

DOI: 10.4236/jssm.2009.24051                

Abstract

In order to keep the economic growing, the Chinese government released series of public policies with regard to stimulate consumption and expand domestic demand. This paper, based on the series data of GDP, Per Capita Annual Disposable Income of Urban Households (PCAD), and Per Capita Annual Net Income of Rural House-holds (PCAN) of Gansu province from 1978 to 2007, analyzed the relationship and causality of the PCAD and PCAN to GDP by using the methodologies called Grey Incidence Relation and Granger Causality Tests. The outcomes show that: the incidences relation of PCAD and PCAN to GDP are prominent, and the trend of the prominent concerning PCAD to GDP is climbing; the PCAD and PCAN are the Granger causality to GDP, which means the GDP could increase 0.7337% unit due to the 1% unit increase of PCAN. Instead, the GDP only could increase 0.4817 % unit due to the 1% unit increase of PCAD. The conclusion indicates that to improve the net income of rural households is a priority selection to stimulate the economic growth, and the governments should rethink the role of the farmers and the agriculture issue.

Keywords

Grey Incidence Relation, Granger Causality Test, Income Level, Economic Growth, Gansu Province

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Z. G. Wen and J. N. Chen, “A cost-benefit analysis for the economic growth in China,” Ecological Economics, Vol. 65, pp. 356–366, 2008.
[2]	A. H. Carsten, “China’s economic growth 1978–2025: What we know today about china’s economic growth to-morrow,” World Development, Vol. 36, pp. 1665–1691, 2008.
[3]	World Bank, “China 2009 growth forecast to 6.5%,” China Quarterly Update, pp. 9, March 18, 2009.
[4]	R. Clarke, “More evidence on incomer distribution and growth [J],” Journal of Development Economics, Vol. 47, No. 2, pp. 403–427, 1995.
[5]	W. X. Zhou, “Case study of the relation between house-hold’s income and economic growth [J],” Economic Sci-ence, Vol. 1, pp. 40–47, 2002.
[6]	N. Zhao and Y. B. Wei, “Research on the income level and economic development,” Rural Economy, Science and Technology, Vol. 19, pp. 26–27, 2008.
[7]	E. Podrecca and G. Carmeci, “Fixed investment and eco-nomic growth: New results on causality,” Applied Eco-nomics, Vol. 33, pp. 177–182, 2001.
[8]	Y. Li and A. Oberheitmann, “Challenge of rapid eco-nomic growth in china: Reconciling sustainable energy use, environmental stewardship and social development,” Energy Policy, Vol. 37, pp. 1412–1422, 2009.
[9]	T. Persson and G. Tabellini, “Is inequality harmful for growth?” Theory and Evidence, American Economic Re-view, Vol. 84, pp. 600–621, 1994.
[10]	T. Persson and G. Tabellini, “Economic growth,” Quar-terly Journal of Economics, Vol. 77, pp. 465–490, 1994.
[11]	S. He, Y. Li, and R. Z. Wang, “A new approach to per-formance analysis of ejector refrigeration system using grey system theory,” Applied Thermal Engineering, Vol. 29, pp. 1592–1597, 2009.
[12]	G. X. Xu, “Statistic, forecast and decision making,” Shanghai: Shanghai Finance and Economy University Press, pp. 207, 2005.
[13]	Y. F. Cao, “Reviews on granger causality test,” World Economic Research, Vol. 2, pp. 16–21, 2005.