11. Estimation of Disembodied Technical Change During the Kuznets Cycles of Romania’s First Transition to Market Economy

The representative rate was first defined by Pavelescu (1986) as the constant rate which would ensure to obtain the geometrical mean of the fixed base indices of the analysed indicator.

The coefficient of collinear refraction in the case of linear regression with two explanatory variables was first defined and named the coefficient of alignment by Pavelescu (1986).

The 1899 recession was the deepest of the 1862–1914 period. According to Axenciuc & Georgescu (2017), the gross value-added created by the primary sector decreased by 52.7%. In this context, the budgetary revenues collapsed and the budgetary deficit sharply increased. The difficult economic situation was manifest not only in Romania but also in other countries from Europe and Northern America. But, the deepness of the recession sensibly varied among the states, depending on the economic structure and the degree of development. For example, Bordo and Haubrich (2012) mentioned that in the case of the United States, the respective recession was mild, while Lychachov (2021) revealed that Russia faced a prolonged economic and financial crisis during the 1899–1902 period. Also, a very poor harvest caused a great famine in India during the 1899–1900 time interval (Wakimura, 1996).

The definition of Juglar cycles presented in this paper is different from the definition shown in Pavelescu (2013, 2016), due to different methodological assumptions. In the above-mentioned papers, the analysed period is 1862–1918, and the author considered that a Juglar cycle began with the year when an increase in GDP was registered after a recession. Thus, the following Juglar cycles were identified: (a) 1862–1866, (b) 1867–1876, (c) 1877–1887, (d) 1888–1897, (e) 1898–1907 and (f) 1907–1914–1918 and also the following Kuznets cycles: (a) 1862–1876, (b) 1877–1897 and (c) 1898–1914–1918. The above-mentioned periodization of Romania’s economic history during the second part of the nineteenth century has the advantage of correlating some of the Juglar cycles with some social and political events, such as the ample economic and social reforms implemented during the A. I. Cuza’s reign (1862–1866) or the great liberal governance (1876–1888). The disadvantage of this periodization is that it was admitted a Juglar cycle which lasted only 5 years.