IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/oec/ecoaaa/990-en.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Trade and Product Market Policies in Upstream Sectors and Productivity in Downstream Sectors: Firm-Level Evidence from China

Author

Listed:
  • Maria Bas

    (Centre d’Etudes Prospectives et d’Informations Internationales)

  • Orsetta Causa

    (OECD)

Abstract

This paper explores the productivity impact of trade, product market and financial market policies over the last decade in China – a fast growing country where, despite significant reform action, regulatory stance remains still far from OECD standards. The paper makes a critical distinction between downstream and upstream industries, focusing on the indirect effects of regulation in upstream industries on firm performance in downstream manufacturing industries. This framework allows investigating the link between these policies and productivity growth depending on how far incumbents are relative to the technological frontier. The analysis is novel in several respects. Drawing on new OECD policy indicators of sector-level product market regulation and firm level data, econometric estimates deliver new evidence on the potential gains from product and financial market reforms in China, two policy areas that had not been studied in previous empirical literature. Firm-level microeconomic data further allow shedding light on the differential effects of policies within industries, while also highlighting the potential channels through which productivity is affected by reform. The key conclusion that can be derived from the empirical analysis is that further product, trade and financial market reforms would bring substantial gains in China and could therefore speed up the convergence process. Taken at face value, the empirical estimates would imply that aligning product, trade and financial market regulation to the average level observed in OECD countries would bring aggregate manufacturing productivity gains of respectively 9%, 4% and 6.5% after five years. Trade and product market reforms are found to deliver stronger gains for firms that are closer to the industry-level technological frontier, while the reverse holds for financial market reforms. L'impact des réglementations commerciales et du marché des produits dans les secteurs en amont sur la productivité en Chine : une analyse sur données de firmes Cet article explore l’impact des réformes structurelles dans les domaines du commerce international, du marché des produits et des marchés financiers sur la productivité Chinoise au cours des dix dernières, la Chine pouvant être considéré comme un pays en forte croissance dans lequel, malgré la mise en ouvre de réformes importantes, la politique réglementaire reste bien loin des standards de l’OCDE. Cet articule fait une distinction cruciale entre les secteurs en amont et les secteurs en aval, et se concentre sur les effets indirects de la régulation en amont sur la productivité en aval. Ce cadre permet d’étudier le lien entre ces politiques et la croissance de la productivité en fonction de la distance qui sépare les firmes de la frontière technologique. L’analyse est nouvelle à plusieurs égards. S’appuyant sur de nouveaux indicateurs de l’OCDE sur la réglementation du marché des produits et sur une base de données au niveau de la firme, l’analyse délivre des résultats nouveaux sur les gains potentiels en Chine de réformes sur les marchés de produits et financiers, deux domaines inexplorés dans la littérature précédente. Les données au niveau de la firme permettent de mettre en lumière l’effet différentiel des politiques au sein de chaque secteur, et donc par là même les mécanismes potentiels via lesquels les réformes affectent la productivité. La conclusion principale est que davantage de réformes dans les domaines précités pourraient apporter des gains substantiels en Chine, ce qui pourrait donc accélérer le processus de convergence. Les résultats empiriques impliqueraient, pris tels à la lettre, qu’un alignement des politiques réglementaires dans les domaines du marché des produits, du commerce international et des marchés financiers sur le niveau moyen observé dans les pays de l’OCDE apporterait des gains agrégés de productivité de l’ordre de 9%, 4%, et 6.5% respectivement au bout de cinq ans. Les réformes commerciales et du marché des produits délivrent des gains plus importants pour les firmes prés de la frontière technologique tandis que le résultat inverse est trouvé pour les réformes des marchés financiers.

Suggested Citation

  • Maria Bas & Orsetta Causa, 2012. "Trade and Product Market Policies in Upstream Sectors and Productivity in Downstream Sectors: Firm-Level Evidence from China," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 990, OECD Publishing.
  • Handle: RePEc:oec:ecoaaa:990-en
    DOI: 10.1787/5k92pgjgll7l-en
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1787/5k92pgjgll7l-en
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1787/5k92pgjgll7l-en?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Sai Ding & Alessandra Guariglia & Richard Harris, 2016. "The determinants of productivity in Chinese large and medium-sized industrial firms, 1998–2007," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 131-155, April.
    2. Yang, Yang & Mukhopadhaya, Pundarik & Yu, Zhuangxiong, 2020. "Relationship between city size and firm productivity – A new interpretation using the Chinese experience," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 546-558.
    3. Maria Bas, 2013. "Does Services Liberalization Affect Manufacturing Firms' Export Performance? Evidence from India," Working Papers 2013-17, CEPII research center.
    4. Devashish Mitra, 2019. "Responses to Trade Opening: Evidence and Lessons from Asia," Working Papers id:12977, eSocialSciences.
    5. Sabien Dobbelaere & Mark Vancauteren, 2014. "Market imperfections, skills and total factor productivity : Firm-level evidence on Belgium and the Netherlands," Working Paper Research 267, National Bank of Belgium.
    6. Beverelli, Cosimo & Fiorini, Matteo & Hoekman, Bernard, 2017. "Services trade policy and manufacturing productivity: The role of institutions," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 166-182.
    7. Maria Bas & Åsa Johansson & Fabrice Murtin & Giuseppe Nicoletti, 2016. "The effects of input tariffs on productivity: panel data evidence for OECD countries," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 152(2), pages 401-424, May.
    8. Thanh Tam Nguyen-Huu & Minh Nguyen-Khac & Quoc Tran-Nam, 2017. "The role of environmental regulations and innovation in TFP convergence: Evidence from manufacturing SMEs in Vietnam," WIDER Working Paper Series 092, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    9. Christine de la Maisonneuve, 2016. "How to boost export performance in Greece," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1299, OECD Publishing.
    10. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2020. "Aid for Trade and Services Export Diversification in Recipient-Countries," EconStor Preprints 210467, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    11. Sèna K. Gnangnon, 2021. "Aid for Trade and services export diversification in recipient countries," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(2), pages 189-225, June.
    12. Fritsch, Michael & Changoluisa, Javier, 2017. "New business formation and the productivity of manufacturing incumbents: Effects and mechanisms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 237-259.
    13. Fida Karam & Chahir Zaki, 2020. "A new dawn for MENA firms: service trade liberalization for more competitive exports," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(1), pages 19-35, January.
    14. Sai Ding & Puyang Sun & Wei Jiang, 2019. "The Effect of Foreign Entry Regulation on Downstream Productivity: Microeconomic Evidence from China," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 121(3), pages 925-959, July.
    15. Thanh Tam Nguyen-Huu & Minh Nguyen-Khac & Quoc Tran-Nam, 2017. "The role of environmental regulations and innovation in TFP convergence: Evidence from manufacturing SMEs in Vietnam," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2017-92, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    16. Huang, Geng & Lin, Xi & He, Ling-Yun, 2023. "Good for the environment? Foreign investment opening in service sector and firm's energy efficiency," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(PA).
    17. Hayakawa, Kazunobu & Mukunoki, Hiroshi & Yang, Chih-hai, 2020. "Liberalization for services FDI and export quality: Evidence from China," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    18. Bas, Maria, 2020. "The effect of communication and energy services reform on manufacturing firms’ innovation," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 339-362.
    19. Avdiu,Besart & Bagavathinathan,Karan Singh & Chaurey,Ritam & Nayyar,Gaurav, 2022. "India's Services Sector Growth : The Impact of Services Trade on Non-tradable Services," Policy Research Working Paper Series 10094, The World Bank.
    20. Duan, Yuwan & Dietzenbacher, Erik & Los, Bart & Yang, Cuihong, 2021. "How much did China's emergence as “the world's factory” contribute to its national income?," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    China; Chine; données de firmes; financial liberalisation; firm level data; libéralisation commerciale; libéralisation financière; product market reform; productivity; productivité; réformes du marché des produits; trade liberalisation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D24 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Production; Cost; Capital; Capital, Total Factor, and Multifactor Productivity; Capacity
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • L8 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services
    • O1 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development
    • O5 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:oec:ecoaaa:990-en. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/edoecfr.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.