This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Impacts of Industry Mix, Technological Change, Selection and Plant Entry/Exit on Regional Productivity Growth

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
David L. Rigby, Jurgen Essletzbichler
Abstract

RIGBY D. L. and ESSLETZBICHLER J. (2000) Impacts of industry mix, technological change, selection and plant entry/exit on regional productivity growth, Reg. Studies 34 , 333-342. In this paper we identify five sources of regional productivity growth: changes in industry mix; technological change by incumbent plants; selection, or changes in plant market shares; plant entry; and plant exit. These sources of productivity change are measured for US states over the period 1963 to 1992. The geography of productivity change is shown to be complex; the absolute and relative size of the components of change vary considerably between regions and over time. Contrary to simplistic accounts that view productivity improvement solely as the result of technological change, we reveal that in a number of states efficiency gains within incumbent plants are overwhelmed by other sources of productivity growth. In addition, we show that rates of plant entry and plant exit are significantly higher in the sunbelt states of the south and west of the US than in the snowbelt. Plant turnover is lower than average in the traditional manufacturing belt of the US. Plants in this region are more likely to be incumbents, and thus longer-lived, than elsewhere. RIGBY D. L. et ESSLETZBICHLER J. (2000) Les retombées de la structure industrielle, du progrès technologique, de la sélection et de l'entrée/la sortie des établissements sur la croissance régionale de la productivité, Reg. Studies 34 , 333- 342. Cet article cherchè a identifier cinq composantes de la croissance de la productivité régionale: ¤ a savoir, le changement de la structure industrielle; le progrès technologique des établissements déj ¤ a implantés dans la région; la sélection, ou le changement de la part de marché des établissement; l'entrée des établissements; la sortie des établissements. Ces composantes du changement de la productivité sont estimées pour les Etats-Unis sur la période de 1963 ¤ a 1992. La géographie du changement de la productivité s'avère complexe: l'importance absolue et relative des composantes varie sensiblement suivant la région et sur le temps. Contrairement aux comptes-rendus simplistes qui ne considèrent la croissance de la productivité que le résultat des avancées technologiques, on laisse voir que dans de nombreux Etats les gains de rendement des établissements déj ¤ a implante ´s dans la région se voient dépasser par d'autres composantes de la croissance de la productivité. Qui plus est, on démontre que l'entrée et la sortie des établissements sont nettement plus fréquentes dans les Etats du Sud et de l'Ouest des Etats-Unis qu'elles ne le sont dans les Etats qui connaissent des hivers rigoureux. Dans lesdits Etats industriels, le taux de renouvellement des établissements s'avère en-dessous de la moyenne. Les établissements situés dans ces régions sont plus susceptibles d'être des établissements déj ¤ a implantés, et par la suite plus anciens, qu'ailleurs. RIGBY D. L. und ESSLETZBICHLER J. (2000) Auswirkungen von Branchenstruktur der Industrie, technologische Umstellung, Auswahl und Betriebseröffnungen/Schließungen auf den Zuwachs regionaler Produktivität, Reg. Studies 34 , 333-342. In diesem Aufsatz werden fünf Ursachen regionaler Produktivitätszunahme identifiziert: Veränderungen in der Branchenstruktur der Industrie; technologische Umstellung in vorhandenen Betrieben; Auswahl, oder Veränderungen in den Marktanteilen der Betriebe; Betriebseröffnungen; und Betriebsschließungen. Diese Ursachen des Produktivitätswandels im Zeitraum 1963-92 werden für Mitgliedstaaten der USA gemessen. Die Geographie des Produktivitätswandels erweist sich als komplex: absolute und relative Größe der Bestandteile des Wandels schwanken beträchtlich, sowohl von Region zu Region als auch im Laufe der Zeit. Im Gegensatz zu simplistischen Darstellungen, die Verbesserungen der Produktivität rein als Ergebnis technologischer Umstellungen ansehen, wird hier aufgezeigt, daß in einer Anzahl von Staaten Leistungsanstiege in vorhandenen Betrieben durchaus hinter anderen Ursachen der Produktionszunahme zurücktreten. Darüberhinaus wird gezeigt, daß die Raten der Betriebseröffnungen und Betriebsschließungen in den sonnigeren Breiten des Südens und Westens bedeutend höher waren als in den schneereicheren Breiten der USA, in denen industrielle Herstellung schon immer eine Rolle gespielt hat, ist der Betriebsumsatz geringer als der Durchschnitt. In Betrieben dieser Regionen ist es wahrscheinlicher, daß sie Geschäftsinhaber und deshalb langlebiger als anderswo sind.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com/link.asp?target=contribution&id=W1WUPCPC6QVC48LT
File Format: text/html
File Function:
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Publisher Info
Article provided by Taylor and Francis Journals in its journal Regional Studies.

Volume (Year): 34 (2000)
Issue (Month): 4 (June)
Pages: 333-342
Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Handle: RePEc:taf:regstd:v:34:y:2000:i:4:p:333-342

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com/link.asp?target=journal&id=104661

Order Information:
Web: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/subscription.html

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).

Related research
Keywords: Productivity Growth Technological Change Selection Plant Entry/EXIT Industry Mix;

Other versions of this item:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Robert H Mcguckin & George A Pascoe, 1988. "The Longitudinal Research Database (LRD): Status And Research Possibilities," Working Papers 88-2, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau. [Downloadable!]
  2. Sala-i-Martin, Xavier X, 1996. "The Classical Approach to Convergence Analysis," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(437), pages 1019-36, July. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  3. Kollmann, Robert, 1995. "The correlation of productivity growth across regions and industries in the United States," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 47(3-4), pages 437-443, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Lucia Foster & John Haltiwanger & C.J. Krizan, 1998. "Aggregate Productivity Growth: Lessons from Microeconomic Evidence," NBER Working Papers 6803, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  5. Eric J. Bartelsman & Mark Doms, 2000. "Understanding Productivity: Lessons from Longitudinal Microdata," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(3), pages 569-594, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  6. Robert J. Barro, 1991. "Economic Growth in a Cross Section of Countries," NBER Working Papers 3120, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  7. Quah, Danny, 1996. "Twin Peaks: Growth and Convergence in Models of Distribution Dynamics," CEPR Discussion Papers 1355, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  8. Barro, R.J. & Sala-I-Martin, X., 1991. "Convergence," Papers 645, Yale - Economic Growth Center.
    Other versions:
  9. Dunne, Timothy & Roberts, Mark J & Samuelson, Larry, 1989. "Plant Turnover and Gross Employment Flows in the U.S. Manufacturing Sector," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 7(1), pages 48-71, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  10. Peter Johnson & Simon Parker, 1996. "Spatial Variations in the Determinants and Effects of Firm Births and Deaths," Regional Studies, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 30(7), pages 679-688, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  11. Doms, Mark & Dunne, Timothy & Roberts, Mark J., 1995. "The role of technology use in the survival and growth of manufacturing plants," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 523-542, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  12. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521465618 is not listed on IDEAS
  13. R.D. Norton & J. Rees, 1979. "The product cycle and the spatial decentralization of American manufacturing," Regional Studies, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 141-151, April. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  14. Bernard, Andrew B & Jones, Charles I, 1996. "Technology and Convergence," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(437), pages 1037-44, July. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  15. Fogarty, Michael S. & Garofalo, Gasper A., 1988. "Urban spatial structure and productivity growth in the manufacturing sector of cities," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 60-70, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  16. Danny Quah, 1996. "Twin Peaks: Growth and Convergence in Models of Distribution Dynamics," CEP Discussion Papers dp0280, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE. [Downloadable!]
  17. Baumol, William J, 1986. "Productivity Growth, Convergence, and Welfare: What the Long-run Data Show," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 1072-85, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  18. Olley, G Steven & Pakes, Ariel, 1996. "The Dynamics of Productivity in the Telecommunications Equipment Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(6), pages 1263-97, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  19. Patricia Beeson & Stephen Husted, 1986. "Patterns and determinants of inefficiency in state manufacturing," Working Paper 8603, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland. [Downloadable!]
  20. J. Bradford Jensen & Robert H. McGuckin & Kevin Stiroh, 2000. "The Impact of Vintage and Survival on Productivity: Evidence from Cohorts of U.S. Manufacturing Plants," Economics Program Working Papers 00-01, The Conference Board, Economics Program. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  21. Baldwin, John R. & Raffiquzzaman, Mohammed, 1995. "Selection Versus Evolutionary Adaptation: Learning and Post-entry Performance," Analytical Studies Branch Research Paper Series 1994072e, Statistics Canada, Analytical Studies Branch. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  22. Mark E Doms, 1993. "Inter Fuel Substitution And Energy Technology Heterogeneity In U.S. Manufacturing," Working Papers 93-5, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau. [Downloadable!]
  23. Richard E. Caves, 1997. "Industrial Organization and New Findings on the Turnover and Mobility of Firms," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1808, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research. [Downloadable!]
  24. Geroski, P. A., 1995. "What do we know about entry?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 421-440, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? IDEAS uses the data collected within the RePEc project, the largest online bibliographic database in Economics.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-21.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.