IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hst/hstdps/d07-244.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An International Comparison of the TFP Levels of Japanese, Korean and Cinese Listed Firms

Author

Listed:
  • Kyoji Fukao
  • Tomohiko Inui
  • Shigesaburo Kabe
  • Deqiang Liu

Abstract

The study group on the Creation of a Productivity Database on Japanese, Chinese, and South Korean Firms at the Japan Center for Economic Research (JCER), in conjunction with the Center for Economic Institutions (CEI) of Hitotsubashi University, the Center for China and Asian Studies (CCAS) of Nippon University, and the Center for Corporate Competitiveness of Seoul National University, has compiled the East Asian Listed Companies Database 2007 (EALC 2007). In this paper, we explain the methodology and data sources used in the construction of the EALC 2007. We also conduct some descriptive analysis based on the EALC 2007. To compare the TFP level of firms in these countries, we first estimated the TFP of firms in each country using the method of Good, Nadiri and Sickles (1997). Then we estimated the relative TFP by industry in the benchmark year using Japanese industries as benchmarks and combined the estimated TFP of firms. When estimating relative TFP by industry for Korea and China, we applied the industry-level price estimates of the three countries from the ICPA project and converted industry outputs and inputs into the same currency unit (Japanese Yen). The estimation results obtained indicate that the productivity of Japanese firms is still higher than that of their Chinese and Korean counterparts but that the productivity of Korean firms is rapidly increasing, with the emergence of some firms that are now overtaking their Japanese rivals in terms of productivity, particularly in the electric machinery sector.

Suggested Citation

  • Kyoji Fukao & Tomohiko Inui & Shigesaburo Kabe & Deqiang Liu, 2008. "An International Comparison of the TFP Levels of Japanese, Korean and Cinese Listed Firms," Hi-Stat Discussion Paper Series d07-244, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
  • Handle: RePEc:hst:hstdps:d07-244
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hi-stat.ier.hit-u.ac.jp/research/discussion/2007/pdf/D07-244.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anders Sorensen, 2001. "Comparing Apples to Oranges: Productivity Convergence and Measurement across Industries and Countries: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 1160-1167, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bellone, Flora & Kiyota, Kozo & Matsuura, Toshiyuki & Musso, Patrick & Nesta, Lionel, 2014. "International productivity gaps and the export status of firms: Evidence from France and Japan," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 56-74.
    2. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/6pua9o9a7l90jbmsrrjb1577vb is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Shahid Yusuf, 2012. "From Technological Catch-up to Innovation : The Future of China’s GDP Growth," World Bank Publications - Reports 12781, The World Bank Group.
    4. Jieun Chang & Youngho Kang, 2019. "Instrumental Variable Estimates of the Effect of Management Practices on Firm Performance in Korean Firms," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 106-125, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Miketa, Asami & Mulder, Peter, 2005. "Energy productivity across developed and developing countries in 10 manufacturing sectors: Patterns of growth and convergence," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 429-453, May.
    2. Kiyohiko G. Nishimura & Takanobu Nakajima & Kozo Kiyota, 2005. "Productivity Convergence at the Firm Level," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-341, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    3. Robert Stehrer, 2005. "Employment, Education and Occupation Structures: A Framework for Forecasting," wiiw Research Reports 315, The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, wiiw.
    4. Valerien O. Pede & Raymond J. G. M. Florax & Henri L. F. de Groot & Gustavo Barboza, 2021. "Technological leadership and sectorial employment growth: A spatial econometric analysis for U.S. counties," Economic Notes, Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA, vol. 50(1), February.
    5. Robert Inklaar & Marcel P. Timmer, 2012. "Productivity Convergence Across Industries and Countries: The Importance of Theory-based Measurement," Chapters, in: Matilde Mas & Robert Stehrer (ed.), Industrial Productivity in Europe, chapter 11, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Dijk, Michiel van, 2013. "Productivity growth at the sectoral level: measurement and projections," 2013: Productivity and Its Impacts on Global Trade, June 2-4, 2013. Seville, Spain 152268, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    7. Peter Mulder & Henri Groot, 2007. "Sectoral Energy- and Labour-Productivity Convergence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 36(1), pages 85-112, January.
    8. Scarpetta, Stefano & Tressel, Thierry, 2004. "Boosting productivity via innovation and adoption of new technologies : any role for labor market institutions?," Social Protection Discussion Papers and Notes 29144, The World Bank.
    9. Richard Rogerson, 2008. "Structural Transformation and the Deterioration of European Labor Market Outcomes," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 116(2), pages 235-259, April.
    10. Johannes Van Biesebroeck, 2009. "Disaggregate productivity comparisons: sectoral convergence in OECD countries," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 63-79, October.
    11. Murat Ungor, 2017. "Productivity Growth and Labor Reallocation: Latin America versus East Asia," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 24, pages 25-42, March.
    12. Zuzana Smeets Kristkova & Cornelis Gardebroek & Michiel van Dijk & Hans van Meijl, 2017. "The impact of R&D on factor-augmenting technical change – an empirical assessment at the sector level," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(3), pages 385-417, July.
    13. Mr. Thierry Tressel, 2008. "Does Technological Diffusion Explain Australia’s Productivity Performance?," IMF Working Papers 2008/004, International Monetary Fund.
    14. Jakob B. Madsen & Isfaaq Timol, 2011. "Long-Run Convergence in Manufacturing and Innovation-Based Models," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(4), pages 1155-1171, November.
    15. Andrew B. Bernard & Charles I. Jones, 2001. "Comparing Apples to Oranges: Productivity Convergence and Measurement across Industries and Countries: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 1168-1169, September.
    16. repec:dgr:rugggd:gd-118 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. World Bank, 2013. "Measuring the Real Size of the World Economy : The Framework, Methodology, and Results of the International Comparison Program—ICP," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 13329, December.
    18. Van Dijk, Michiel, 2013. "Productivity growth at the sectoral level: measurement and projections," Conference papers 332295, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    19. Anders Sørensen & Hans Christian Kongsted & Mats Marcusson, 2003. "R&D, public innovation policy, and productivity: The case of danish manufacturing," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 163-178.
    20. Georg Erber & Reinhard Madlener, 2007. "Nested Stochastic Possibility Frontiers with Heterogeneous Capital Inputs," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 720, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    21. Kiyohiko G. Nishimura & Takanobu Nakajima & Kozo Kiyota, 2005. "Innovation Versus Diffusion: Determinants of Productivity Growth Among Japanese Firms," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-350, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Total Factor Productivity; International Comparison; Competitiveness;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D24 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Production; Cost; Capital; Capital, Total Factor, and Multifactor Productivity; Capacity

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hst:hstdps:d07-244. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Tatsuji Makino (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iehitjp.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.