Growth theories giving predominant weight to institutions predict much more serial correlation of growth rates than is found in the data.

True: the empirical literature (for example Easterly, Kremer, Pritchett and Summers 1993 and later work) shows that growth rates have low persistence across decades, while institutions, which are persistent, would imply higher serial correlation of growth than is observed, and this tension is recognised in the growth literature. Mostly true: low persistence of growth is well established and the tension with institutions-based theories is widely noted, but institutionalist theories can partly accommodate it (for example through level effects or changes in institutions). Mixed: growth persistence is low, but whether institutional theories actually predict high serial correlation is substantially contested. Mostly false: the claim overstates the case, for example if growth persistence is shown to be moderate, or if institutional theories plainly predict level effects rather than persistent growth rates. False: the data show high serial correlation of growth rates consistent with institutional theories.

Set before the research began.

1. E1 Good Policy or Good Luck? Country Growth Performance and Temporary Shocks National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER Working Paper 4474) · September 1993

   “However, growth rates are highly unstable over time, with a correlation across decades of .1 to .3, while country characteristics are stable, with cross-decade correlations of .6 to .9.”

2. E2 Good Policy or Good Luck? Country Growth Performance and Temporary Shocks (working paper PDF) NBER Working Paper Series · September 1993

   “Models in which country characteristics determine long-run growth can be reconciled to these facts only if they generate spurts in growth or if there are large random shocks.”

3. E3 Rapid growth in emerging markets and developing economies - CEPR VoxEU / CEPR · 12 September 2014

   “It is well known, from the seminal work of Easterly et al. (1993), that what the economics profession considers as the most likely “fundamental” determinants of economic growth (such as institutional quality, education, and macroeconomic policies) are persistent, whereas economic growth itself is not.”

4. E4 Institutions as the Fundamental Cause of Long-Run Growth NBER Working Paper 10481 (Acemoglu, Johnson, Robinson) · May 2004

   “This paper develops the empirical and theoretical case that differences in economic institutions are the fundamental cause of differences in economic development.”

E1 (Easterly et al. 1993) reports that growth rates correlate only about .1 to .3 across decades, while country characteristics correlate .6 to .9. E3 says it is well known that likely fundamental determinants such as institutional quality are persistent while growth is not. This supports both the low persistence of growth and the recognised tension with institutions-based theories. However, E2 notes that such models can be reconciled with these facts through growth spurts or random shocks, and E4 frames institutions as explaining differences in development levels. That fits the 'mostly true' criterion: institutionalist theories can partly accommodate low growth persistence.