The Sensitivity of Productivity Estimates
Researchers interested in estimating productivity can choose from an array of methodologies, each with its strengths and weaknesses. This study compares productivity estimates and evaluates the extent to which the conclusions of three important productivity debates in the economic development literature are sensitive to the choice of estimation method. Five widely used techniques are considered, two nonparametric and three parametric: index numbers, data envelopment analysis, instrumental variables estimation, stochastic frontiers, and semiparametric estimation. Using data on manufacturing firms in two developing countries, Colombia and Zimbabwe, we find that the different methods produce surprisingly similar productivity estimates when the measures are compared directly, even though the estimated input elasticities vary widely. Furthermore, the methods reach the same conclusions on two of the debates, supporting endogenous growth effects and showing that firm-level productivity changes are an important contributor to aggregate productivity growth. On the third debate, only with the parametric productivity measures is there evidence of learning by exporting.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
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.
Volume (Year): 26 (2008)
Issue (Month): ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.amstat.org/publications/jbes/index.cfm?fuseaction=main|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.amstat.org/publications/index.html|
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.:
- Blundell, R. & Bond, S., 1995.
"Initial Conditions and Moment Restrictions in Dynamic Panel Data Models,"
104, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
- Blundell, Richard & Bond, Stephen, 1998. "Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 115-143, August.
- Richard Blundell & Steve Bond, 1995. "Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models," IFS Working Papers W95/17, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
- R Blundell & Steven Bond, . "Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data model," Economics Papers W14&104., Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
- Richard Blundell & Steve Bond, 1999.
"GMM estimation with persistent panel data: an application to production functions,"
IFS Working Papers
W99/04, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
- Richard Blundell & Stephen Bond, 2000. "GMM Estimation with persistent panel data: an application to production functions," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(3), pages 321-340.
- Bernard, Andrew B. & Bradford Jensen, J., 1999.
"Exceptional exporter performance: cause, effect, or both?,"
Journal of International Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 1-25, February.
- Bernard, A., 1997. "Exceptional Exporter Performance: Cause, Effect, or Both?," Working papers 97-21, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- Andrew B. Bernard & J. Bradford Jensen, 1997. "Exceptional Exporter Performance: Cause, Effect, or Both?," NBER Working Papers 6272, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Acemoglu, Daron & Zilibotti, Fabrizio, 1998.
660, Stockholm University, Institute for International Economic Studies.
- Acemoglu, Daron & Zilibotti, Fabrizio, 2000. "Productivity Differences," CEPR Discussion Papers 2498, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Daron Acemoglu & Fabrizio Zilbotti, 1999. "Productivity Differences," NBER Working Papers 6879, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Acemoglu, D. & Zilibotti, F., 1998. "Productivity Differences," Papers 660, Stockholm - International Economic Studies.
- Aigner, Dennis & Lovell, C. A. Knox & Schmidt, Peter, 1977. "Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 21-37, July.
- Erik Brynjolfsson & Lorin M. Hitt, 2003.
"Computing Productivity: Firm-Level Evidence,"
The Review of Economics and Statistics,
MIT Press, vol. 85(4), pages 793-808, November.
- Aw, Bee Yan & Chen, Xiaomin & Roberts, Mark J., 2001. "Firm-level evidence on productivity differentials and turnover in Taiwanese manufacturing," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 51-86, October.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bes:jnlbes:v:26:y:2008:p:311-328. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Christopher F. Baum)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.