The Impact of Low, Average, and High IQ on Economic Growth and Technological Progress: Do All Individuals Contribute Equally?

Burhan, Nik Ahmad Sufian and Mohamad, Mohd Rosli and Kurniawan, Yohan and Sidek, Abdul Halim (2014): The Impact of Low, Average, and High IQ on Economic Growth and Technological Progress: Do All Individuals Contribute Equally? Published in: Intelligence , Vol. 46, (September 2014): pp. 1-8.

Abstract

Individuals that reside in the highest social stratum of intelligence (i.e., those that have a high IQ) have been shown to generate relatively more national income and are more innovative, with those that have the lowest levels of IQ being less influential on economic development. However, the degree to which all levels of IQ influence economic growth and technological innovation remains unclear. By assuming that the IQ of a population is modeled based on a bell curve, we arrange IQ into three strata, namely intellectual class, average ability citizens, and non-intellectual class, which are represented by the 95th, 50th, and 5th percentiles of cognitive ability, respectively. Our multiple hierarchical regression analysis of a sample of over 60 countries shows that the intellectual class has the greatest impact on economic growth followed by average ability citizens and the non-intellectual class in that order. Moreover, we find evidence that the impact of the intellectual class on technological progress is exceptionally more significant than even the number of professional researchers engaged in R&D activities, with average ability citizens and the non-intellectual class not significant. These findings allow us to suggest that the government and private institutions should not only employ professionals with good experiences and high academic credentials, but also those who has excellent IQ levels to work in their R&D sectors. However, in order to foster economic growth, governments should invest into facilities that benefit all societal groups of intelligence level, with highest priority given to the intellectual class, followed by the average ability citizens and the non-intellectual class respectively.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: economic growth; innovation; intellectual class; national IQ; non-intellectual class; patent
• Subjects: I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I2 - Education and Research Institutions > I25 - Education and Economic Development; J - Labor and Demographic Economics > J2 - Demand and Supply of Labor > J24 - Human Capital ; Skills ; Occupational Choice ; Labor Productivity; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights > O30 - General; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O4 - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity > O47 - Empirical Studies of Economic Growth ; Aggregate Productivity ; Cross-Country Output Convergence; Z - Other Special Topics > Z1 - Cultural Economics ; Economic Sociology ; Economic Anthropology > Z13 - Economic Sociology ; Economic Anthropology ; Social and Economic Stratification

References

Acemoglu, D. (1996). A microfoundation for social increasing returns in human capital accumulation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 111, 779–804.

Barro, R. J., & Lee, J. W. (2010). A new data set of educational attainment in the world, 1950–2010 (NBER Working Papers 15902). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

Barro, R. J., & Sala-i-Martin, X. (1997). Technological diffusion, convergence, and growth. Journal of Economic Growth, 2, 1–26.

Ciccone, A., & Papaioannou, E. (2009). Human capital, the structure of production, and growth. Review of Economics and Statistics, 91, 66–82.

Comin, D. A., Easterly, W., & Gong, E. (2010). Was the wealth of nations determined in 1000 BC? American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 2, 65–97.

Davies, H. (1996). High IQ and low technology: Hong Kong’s key to success. Long Range Planning, 29, 684–690.

Furman, J. L., Porter, M. E., & Stern, S. (2002). The determinants of national innovative capacity. Research Policy, 31, 899–933.

Gelade, G. A. (2008). IQ, cultural values, and the technological achievement of nations. Intelligence, 36, 711−718.

Gerschenkron, A. (1962). Economic backwardness in historical perspective. A book of essays. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Hanushek, E. A., & Kimko, D. D. (2000). Schooling, labor-force quality, and the growth of nations. American Economic Review, 90, 1184–1208.

Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2008). The role of cognitive skills in economic development. Journal of Economic Literature, 46, 607–668.

Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2012). Do better schools lead to more growth? Cognitive skills, economic outcomes, and causation. Journal of Economic Growth, 17, 267–321.

Hart, M. (2007). Understanding human history. Augusta, GA: Washington Summit Publishers.

Herrnstein, R. J., & Murray, C. (2010). Bell curve: Intelligence and class structure in American life. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.

Heston, A., Summers, R., & Aten, B. (2012). Penn World Table Version 7.1, Center for International Comparisons of Production, Income and Prices at the University of Pennsylvania, November 30, 2012.

Howitt, P. (2005). Health, human capital, and economic Growth: A Schumpeterian perspective. In G. Lopez-Casasnovas, B.Rivera, & L. Currais (Eds), Health and economic growth: Findings and policy implications (pp. 19–40). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Jamison, E. A., Jamison, D. T., & Hanushek. E. A. (2007). The effects of education quality on mortality decline and income growth. Economics of Education Review, 26, 772–789.

Jones, G., & Schneider, W. J. (2006). Intelligence, human capital, and a Bayesian Averaging of Classical Estimates (BACE) approach. Journal of Economic Growth, 11, 71–93.

Jones, G., & Schneider, W. J. (2010). IQ in the production function: Evidence from immigrant earnings. Economic Inquiry, 48, 743–755.

Lynn, R. (2012). IQs predict differences in the technological development of nations from 1000 BC through 2000 AD. Intelligence, 40, 439–444.

Lynn, R., & Meisenberg, G. (2010). National IQs calculated and validated for 108 nations. Intelligence, 38, 353–360.

Lynn, R., Meisenberg, G., Mikk, J., & Williams, A. (2007). National IQs predict differences in scholastic achievement in 67 countries. Journal of Biosocial Science, 39, 861–874.

Lynn, R., & Mikk, J. (2007). National differences in intelligence and educational attainment. Intelligence, 35, 115–121.

Lynn, R., & Mikk, J. (2009). National IQs predict attainment in math, science and reading across 56 nations. Intelligence, 37, 305–310.

Lynn, R., & Vanhanen, T. (2002). IQ and the wealth of nations. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Lynn, R., & Vanhanen, T. (2006). IQ and global inequality. Augusta, GA: Washington Summit.

Mankiw, N. G., Romer, D., & Weil, D. N. (1992). A contribution to the empirics of economic growth. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107, 407–437.

Meisenberg, G., & Lynn, R. (2011). Intelligence: A measure of human capital in nations. Journal of Social, Political & Economic Studies, 36, 421–454.

OECD (2010). PISA 2009 at a glance. Paris: OECD Publishing. Available online at http://www.oecd.org/pisa/46660259.pdf.

Park, G., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2008). Ability differences among people who have commensurate degrees matter for scientific creativity. Psychological Science, 19, 957–961.

Pritchett, L., &, Viarengo, M. (2009). Producing superstars for the economic mundial: The Mexican predicament with quality of education. In R. Hausmann, E. L. Austin, & I. Mia (Eds), The Mexico competitiveness report 2009 (pp. 71–89). Genf/Harvard: World Economic Forum.

Ram, R. (2007). IQ and economic growth: Further augmentation of Mankiw–Romer–Weil model. Economics Letters, 94, 7–11.

Rindermann, H. (2007). The g-factor of international cognitive ability comparisons: The homogeneity of results in PISA, TIMSS, PIRLS and IQ-tests across nations. European Journal of Personality, 21, 667−706.

Rindermann, H. (2012). Intellectual classes, technological progress and economic development: The rise of cognitive capitalism. Personality and Individual Differences, 53, 108–113.

Rindermann, H., Sailer, S., & Thompson, J. (2009). The impact of smart fractions, cognitive ability of politicians and average competence of peoples on social development. Talent Development & Excellence, 1, 3–25.

Rindermann, H., & Thompson, J. (2011). Cognitive capitalism: The effect of cognitive ability on wealth, as mediated through scientific achievement and economic freedom. Psychological Science, 22, 754–763.

Romer, P. M. (1986). Increasing returns and long-run growth. Journal of Political Economy, 94, 1002–1037.

Romer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 71–102.

UNESCO (2005). Education for all: The quality imperative (EFA Global Monitoring Report 2005). Paris: UNESCO. Available online at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001373/137333e.pdf

USCB (2013). International Database. United States Census Bureau. Available only at: http://www.census.gov/ population/international/data/idb/informationGateway.php.

Wai, J. (2013). Investigating America's elite: Cognitive ability, education, and sex differences. Intelligence, 41, 203–211.

WIPO (2009). Patent applications by patent office (1883- 2007), by resident and non-resident. Geneva: World Intellectual Property Organization. Available online at: http://www.wipo.int/ipstats/en/statistics/patents.

World Bank (2013). World development indicators 2013. Washington, DC: World Bank. Available online at: http://data.worldbank.org