Energy Consumption and Carbon Emission Based Industrial Productivity in China: A Sustainable Development Analysis

The paper investigates the determinants of productivity growth in China. It also analyses the sustainability of the country's industrial growth by estimating sectoral productivity, accounting for energy usage and emission since the market‐oriented reforms launched in the late 1970s. The empirical analysis indicates that productivity is the most significant driver of growth. The substantial productivity improvement of China's industry is mainly attributable to high‐tech light industrial sectors. Heavy industry lags behind in terms of productivity and overall technical change.     

Markets and the non‐monotonic relation between productivity and establishment size

Abstract A model of monopolistic competition is presented in which the relation between the productivity and input size of producers is non‐monotonic and bell‐shaped. The model predicts that markets matter and the average size of the producers is directly scaled by the size of the market. An indirect effect increases the cutoff productivity, making the bell narrower in larger markets or when the transportation cost falls. Empirical evidence from the concrete industry and a few other 4‐digit industries supports the model’s predictions. The bell‐shaped relation has especially important implications on how size distributions are formed across localized versus globalized market industries.     

HUMAN CAPITAL AND CONVERGENCE: A PRODUCTION‐FRONTIER APPROACH*

Using nonparametric, production‐frontier methods, we decompose labor productivity growth into components attributable to technological change (shifts in the world production frontier), technological catch‐up (movements toward or away from the frontier), and physical and human capital accumulation (movements along the frontier). We find that (1) technological change is decidedly nonneutral, (2) productivity growth is driven primarily by physical and human capital accumulation, (3) the increased international dispersion of productivity is explained primarily by physical capital accumulation, and (4) international polarization (the shift from a unimodal to a bimodal distribution) is brought about primarily by efficiency changes (technological catch‐up).     

Structure and performance of the service sector in transition economies1

This paper examines the performance of the service sector in the Eastern European transition economies during the 1997–2004 period. The performance of the service sector as a whole and of its sub‐sectors is very heterogeneous within the region. Service sub‐sectors that are information and communications technology producers or users and those using skilled labour more intensively exhibit the highest labour productivity growth. Our estimates show a positive and significant effect of liberalization on service labour productivity growth that is stronger for sub‐sectors that are more distant from the technological frontier. Service liberalization is also shown to have a positive effect on labour productivity levels and growth of downstream manufacturing industries.     

THE SOURCES OF AGGREGATE PRODUCTIVITY GROWTH: US MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES, 1958–1996

The sources of aggregate productivity growth are explored using detailed data for four‐digit US manufacturing industries during 1958–96 and a decomposition formula that allows us to quantify the contribution of structural change. Labour productivity as well as total factor productivity are considered with either value‐added or employment shares serving as aggregation weights. It is shown that structural change generally works in favour of industries with increasing productivity. This effect is particularly strong in the years since 1990, in high‐tech industries and in durable goods producing industries. The impact of the computer revolution can be clearly identified.     

Products and Productivity*

When firms make decisions about which product to manufacture at a more disaggregated level than observed in the data, measured firm productivity reflects both characteristics of the firm and attributes of the products that are non‐randomly chosen by the firm. This paper develops a model of industry equilibrium in which firms endogenously sort across products and characterizes the resulting bias in measured firm and aggregate productivity. Calibrating the model's parameters, we show that endogenous product selection can have quantitatively important effects on measured firm and aggregate productivity and their response to changes in parameter values.     

Convergence in Structure and Productivity in European Manufacturing?

Abstract. We find fast convergence in productivity for 99 three‐digit European industries over the 1985–98 period. Half of any productivity gap is closed on average in about 10–15 years. We explicitly formulate the steady‐state assumptions for structural convergence to hold. Convergence in industrial structure is much slower than productivity catch‐up with a half‐life of around 50 years, a stylized fact which cannot easily be explained by the existing models of trade and growth.     

Technological change,efficiency gains and capital accumulation in labour productivity growth and convergence: an application to the Spanish regions

The main objective of this article is to analyse labour productivity growth and convergence in the Spanish regions between 1965 and 1995, decomposing total factor productivity gains into technological progress and efficiency change by means of Malmquist productivity indices. On the basis of this decomposition, labour productivity growth is broken down into components attributable to technological change (shifts in the frontier), efficiency gains (movements toward the frontier) and capital accumulation (movements along the frontier). The approach followed in this study is based on work initiated by Färe et al., where a link between the economic growth and convergence literature and the production frontier approach was established. Furthermore, in the spirit of Quah's approach, the evolution of the whole distribution is considered. Thus, the analysis of the dynamics of the entire distribution of labour productivity and the factors behind it – technological progress, efficiency gains and capital accumulation – combine both approaches, yielding new insights into the process of productivity growth and convergence experienced by the Spanish regions over the last 30 years.     

VENTURE CAPITAL AND INNOVATION: WHICH IS FIRST?

Policy‐makers typically interpret positive relations between venture capital (VC) investments and innovations as evidence that VC investments stimulate innovation (VC‐first hypothesis). This interpretation is, however, one‐sided because there may be a reverse causality that innovations induce VC investments (innovation‐first hypothesis): an arrival of new technology increases demand for VC. We analyze this causality issue of VC and innovation in the US manufacturing industry using both total factor productivity growth and patent counts as measures of innovation. We find that, consistent with the innovation‐first hypothesis, total factor productivity growth is often positively and significantly related with future VC investment. We find little evidence that supports the VC‐first hypothesis.     

FDI and productivity growth: the role of inter‐industry linkages

Abstract There is a large literature on the effects of foreign direct investment (FDI) on productivity through inter‐industry economic linkages. This paper contributes to the literature by focusing on the developed economy of Canada. It finds that FDI generates strong effects on total factor productivity (TFP) growth through both forward and backward inter‐industry linkages, and increase in an industry's absorptive capacity raises the effects of FDI on TFP growth through forward inter‐industry linkages. For R&D intensive industries, the effects of FDI on TFP growth through inter‐industry linkages are small, but imports turn out to be an important source for TFP growth.     

GROWTH,INTER‐INDUSTRY AND INTRA‐INDUSTRY COMPETITION AND WELFARE*

In this paper we introduce strategic interaction between firms in an R&D growth model which captures both the intra‐industry competition between firms operating within an industry and the inter‐industry competition between firms in different industries. We show that the more substitutable the goods produced within each industry (across industries) are, that is, the more intense the intra‐industry (inter‐industry) competition, the higher is the growth rate. In the comparison between social optimum and a decentralized economy, it is shown that the market outcome is characterized by inefficiently high entry of firms within each industry and insufficient productivity growth.     

Productivity Growth of the Nontradable Sectors in China

Little is known about the total factor productivity of the nontradable sectors in China. In this paper we estimate productivity growth of the nontradable sectors by studying the relative price movements of the nontradable sectors vis‐à‐vis the tradable sectors, i.e. changes in the internal real exchange rate. We find that prices of the nontradable sectors have risen significantly faster than those of the tradable sectors since China's accession to the WTO, and as a result China's internal real exchange rate has appreciated faster than the renminbi real effective exchange rate. We also find that the nontradable sectors have seen much lower productivity growth than the tradable sectors. We argue that it is important to raise China's productivity growth in the nontradable sectors through policy actions to achieve growth rebalancing and containing inflationary pressures in the medium run.     

Competition and productivity growth in South Africa

This article shows that mark‐ups are significantly higher in South African manufacturing industries than they are in corresponding industries worldwide. We test for the consequences of this low‐level of product market competition on productivity growth. The results of the paper are that high mark‐ups have a large negative impact on productivity growth in South African manufacturing industry. Our results are robust to three different data sources, two alternative measures of productivity growth, and three distinct measures of the mark‐up. Controlling for potential endogeneity of regressors does not eliminate the findings.     

Does international openness affect the productivity of local firms?

This paper examines how international openness can change firm productivity in south‐eastern Europe (SEE), a crucial question for middle‐income countries. Using firm‐level data for six transition economies over the 1995–2002 period, we identify whether foreign ownership and propensity to trade with more advanced countries can bring about higher learning effects. We find that: (i) foreign ownership has helped restructure and enhance the productivity of local firms in four out of six countries; (ii) exporting to advanced markets has a larger impact on productivity growth in four countries, especially when the firm's absorptive capacity is taken into account; (iii) in contrast, exporting to the less competitive markets of the former Yugoslavia seems to negatively affect productivity growth in three countries; and (iv) learning effects from importing are similar to those from exporting. Our results suggest that trade liberalization is not uniformly beneficial. Regional composition of trade flows and absorptive capacity of local firms matter. Thus, trade liberalization within the SEE region may not provide a substitute for a general trade liberalization which includes access to the more competitive markets of countries belonging to the Organization for Economic Co‐operation and Development.     

Export Market Dynamics and Plant‐Level Productivity: Impact of Tariff Reductions and Exchange‐Rate Cycles*

In this paper, we examine how changes in tariff rates and industry‐specific real exchange rates affect the entry/exit process to export markets and productivity growth. Using the experience of the Canadian manufacturing sector over three decades, we find that firms in export markets enjoy faster productivity growth than non‐participants. The size of the growth advantage depends on whether real exchange rates are increasing or decreasing. The increase in the value of the Canadian dollar during the post‐2000 period almost completely offset the productivity growth advantages enjoyed by new exporters during this period.     

A Generalized Exactly Additive Decomposition of Aggregate Labor Productivity Growth

Aggregate labor productivity (ALP) growth—i.e., growth of output per unit of labor—may be decomposed into additive contributions due to within‐sector productivity growth effect, dynamic structural reallocation effect (Baumol effect), and static structural reallocation effect (Denison effect) of cross‐sectional components (e.g., industry or region) of output and labor. This paper implements ALP growth decomposition that is “generalized” to output in constant prices and to output in chained prices (i.e., chained volume measure or CVM) and “exactly additive” since with either output the sum of contributions exactly equals “actual” ALP growth. It compares this “generalized exactly additive” decomposition (GEAD) to the “traditional” (TRAD) ALP growth decomposition devised for output in constant prices. The results show GEAD and TRAD are exactly additive when output is in constant prices, but GEAD is exactly additive while TRAD is not when output is in CVM. Also, GEAD components are empirically purer than or analytically superior to those from TRAD. Moreover, considering that contributions to ALP growth can be classified by industry or region each year over many years, GEAD provides a more well‐grounded picture over time of industrial or regional transformation than TRAD. Therefore, GEAD should replace TRAD in practice.     

FACTOR DETERMINANTS OF TOTAL FACTOR PRODUCTIVITY GROWTH FOR THE JAPANESE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY

This study uses industrial panel data for Japanese manufacturing to estimate the sources of productivity growth by simultaneously considering embodied technical progress, spillover effects, and openness, after controlling for returns to scale, imperfect competition, and capacity utilization. Estimation results show the existence of considerable embodied technical progress and interindustry externalities of capital investments positively affecting productivity growth. Furthermore, embodied technical progress causes research and development (R&D) capital to affect productivity growth insignificantly, suggesting that the impact of R&D is realized only after being embodied into other capitals. From sector‐wise estimations, we notice differences in factors affecting productivity growth between the durable and nondurable manufacturing sectors. (JEL D24, O30)     

The Role of Agricultural Productivity on Structural Change

Many authors have estimated and found that the productivity growth in agriculture is higher than that in non‐agriculture in today's richest countries. Several papers suggested that growth in agricultural productivity was essential for today's richest countries to take off early. However, few articles noticed that growth in agricultural productivity is critical in driving structural change in today's richest countries. This paper studies a two‐sector neoclassical growth model with subsistence agricultural consumption and shows that growth in agricultural productivity plays a more important role than growth in non‐agricultural productivity in governing massive structural change in today's richest countries.     

The productivity trend in Iran Evidence from manufacturing firms

Iran has been experiencing slow growth for the past ten years. Using plant‐level information, we show that on average firm‐specific productivity in manufacturing sectors declined at the rate of 2.6% annually, while large top decile firms experienced a modest growth in productivity between 2005 and 2011. We decompose this trend and find that within‐plant variation is its main driving force while the between firms and industries component is insignificant. We test several alternative explanations that may contribute to these negative trends. We show that the subsidy reform had a negative effect, while privatization seems to have had no effect. Private management not affected productivity growth, while firm size is associated with higher productivity growth. Also, we find that productivity growth decreases with the energy intensity of the firm. We also find that R&D expenditures significantly increase productivity growth, while the R&D sales ratio is about 0.5% in manufacturing sectors, which is about one‐fifth of the world average. A one‐percent point increase in R&D expenditures increases productivity growth by 0.5%.     

Increasing Returns,Financial Capital Mobility and Real Exchange Rate Dynamics*

The late 1990s saw a US IT investment boom, large capital flows into the USA and an appreciation of the US$. At the time, this appeared to be driven by expectations of continued IT‐related knowledge spillover externalities and associated productivity and profit growth. Using a two‐region dynamic general equilibrium model with externalities, we find a once‐off productivity shock leads to capital inflow and a real appreciation only in the short term. In the long term, capital flows stabilise and the real exchange rate depreciates. For a single shock to trigger long‐term growth in capital flows requires unrealistically large externalities.