Cristelli Matthieu, Tacchella Andrea, Cader Masud
Country Analytics, International Finance Corporation-World Bank Group, Washington, DC 20433, USA.
Institute of Complex Systems, National Research Council (CNR), 00185 Rome, Italy.
Entropy (Basel). 2018 Oct 3;20(10):761. doi: 10.3390/e20100761.
Does the infrastructure stock catalyze the development of new capabilities and ultimately of new products or vice-versa? Here we want to quantify the interplay between these two dimensions from a temporal dynamics perspective and, namely, to address whether the interaction occurs predominantly in a specific direction. We therefore need to measure the complexity of an economy (i.e., its capability stock) and the infrastructure stock of a country. For the former, we leverage a previously proposed metrics, the Economic Fitness (Tacchella, A.; et al. , , 723). For the latter, we propose a new purely statistical indicator which is the performed on the 47 infrastructure indicators published by the World Bank. The proposed indicator still belongs to the class of linear combination of relevant indicators but, differently from standard economic indicators of the same type as the , the , etc, the weights of the linear combination are not subjectively chosen or re-calibrated on a regular basis but they are those which capture the highest fraction of the information encoded in the initial dataset. The two metrics allow the study of the dynamics in the plane and reveal the existence of two regimes: one for low Fitness where the infrastructure and the complexity of an economy are unrelated and a second regime where the two dimensions are tightly related. To quantify the interplay of the two dimensions in this latter regime, we assume a parsimonious linear dynamic model and the emerging picture is that: (i) the feedback occurs in both directions; (ii) on the short-term (<3 years) the predominant direction of interaction is from infrastructure to capability stock; (iii) while for longer time scale (>3 years) the interaction is reversed, new capabilities lead to increasing infrastructure stock.
基础设施存量是催化新能力的发展并最终推动新产品的开发,还是反之亦然?在这里,我们想从时间动态的角度量化这两个维度之间的相互作用,也就是说,要探讨这种相互作用是否主要在特定方向上发生。因此,我们需要衡量一个经济体的复杂性(即其能力存量)和一个国家的基础设施存量。对于前者,我们利用先前提出的指标“经济适应性”(塔切拉,A.等人,[具体文献信息],723)。对于后者,我们提出了一个全新的纯统计指标,该指标是基于世界银行公布的47个基础设施指标进行[具体操作]得出的。所提出的指标仍属于相关指标线性组合的类别,但与诸如[列举其他类似标准经济指标]等同一类型的标准经济指标不同,线性组合的权重不是主观选择或定期重新校准的,而是那些能够捕获初始数据集中编码信息最大比例的权重。这两个指标允许对[具体平面]中的动态进行研究,并揭示出两种状态的存在:一种是低适应性状态,此时基础设施与经济体的复杂性无关;另一种状态是这两个维度紧密相关。为了量化后一种状态下两个维度的相互作用,我们假设了一个简约的线性动态模型,得出的情况是:(i)反馈在两个方向上都存在;(ii)在短期内(<3年),相互作用的主要方向是从基础设施到能力存量;(iii)而在较长时间尺度(>3年)上,相互作用则相反,新能力会导致基础设施存量增加。