Abstract
SUMMARY
This paper investigates the replicability of three important studies on growth theory uncertainty that employed Bayesian model averaging tools. We compare these results with estimates obtained using alternative, recently developed model averaging techniques. Overall, we successfully replicate all three studies, find that the sign and magnitude of these new estimates are reasonably close to those produced via traditional Bayesian methods and deploy a novel strategy to implement one of the new averaging estimators. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
