Relative productivity growth and the secular "decline" of U.S. manufacturing
There has been considerable debate about the causes of the "decline" of U.S. manufacturing over the post-war period. We show that the behavior of employment, prices and output in manufacturing relative to services over this period can be explained by a two-sector growth model in which productivity shocks are the only driving forces. Household preferences turn out to play a key role in our model. The data are consistent with a specification where households are unwilling to substitute goods for services (the estimated elasticity of substitution is statistically indistinguishable from zero), so the economy adjusts to differential productivity growth entirely by re-allocating labor across sectors.
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.:
- Susanto Basu & John Fernald & Miles Kimball, 1998.
"Are technology improvements contractionary?,"
International Finance Discussion Papers
625, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
- Susanto Basu & John Fernald & Miles Kimball, 2004. "Are technology improvements contractionary?," Working Paper Series WP-04-20, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
- Susanto Basu & John Fernald & Miles Kimball, 2004. "Are Technology Improvements Contractionary?," NBER Working Papers 10592, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Susanto Basu & John Fernald & Miles Kimball, 2002. "Are Technology Improvements Contractionary?," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1986, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Greenwood, J. & Hercowitz, Z. & Krusell, P., 1998.
"The Role of Investment-Specific Technological Change in the Business Cycle,"
RCER Working Papers
449, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
- Greenwood, Jeremy & Hercowitz, Zvi & Krusell, Per, 2000. "The role of investment-specific technological change in the business cycle," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 91-115, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:quaeco:v:50:y:2010:i:1:p:67-74. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.