IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/wdevel/v51y2013icp91-103.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Determinants of Capital Intensity in Manufacturing: The Role of Factor Market Imperfections

Author

Listed:
  • Hasan, Rana
  • Mitra, Devashish
  • Sundaram, Asha

Abstract

We study the role of factor market imperfections in determining industry-level capital intensities. Using cross-country panel data on manufacturing industries, we find that labor market imperfections arising from labor regulation have a greater influence on capital intensity than do credit market imperfections. Less restrictive labor regulations are associated with lower capital intensity in manufacturing, especially in middle-income and developing economies and in sectors that either require more frequent labor adjustment or are more unskilled labor intensive. This suggests that stringent labor regulations can impose costs on labor use, thereby curtailing gains from trade based on factor-abundance driven comparative advantage.

Suggested Citation

  • Hasan, Rana & Mitra, Devashish & Sundaram, Asha, 2013. "The Determinants of Capital Intensity in Manufacturing: The Role of Factor Market Imperfections," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 91-103.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:wdevel:v:51:y:2013:i:c:p:91-103
    DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2013.05.012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X13001332
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alejandro Cuñat & Marc J. Melitz, 2012. "Volatility, Labor Market Flexibility, And The Pattern Of Comparative Advantage," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 10(2), pages 225-254, April.
    2. Nathan Nunn, 2007. "Relationship-Specificity, Incomplete Contracts, and the Pattern of Trade," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 122(2), pages 569-600.
    3. Panagariya, Arvind, 2011. "India: The Emerging Giant," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199751563.
    4. Gupta,Poonam & Hasan, Rana & Kumar, Utsav, 2009. "Big Reforms but Small Payoffs: Explaining the Weak Record of Growth in Indian Manufacturing," India Policy Forum, National Council of Applied Economic Research, vol. 5(1), pages 59-123.
    5. Juan C. Botero & Simeon Djankov & Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer, 2004. "The Regulation of Labor," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 119(4), pages 1339-1382.
    6. Peter K. Schott, 2003. "One Size Fits All? Heckscher-Ohlin Specialization in Global Production," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 686-708, June.
    7. Koujianou Goldberg, Pinelopi & Pavcnik, Nina, 2003. "The response of the informal sector to trade liberalization," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 463-496, December.
    8. Andrei A. Levchenko, 2007. "Institutional Quality and International Trade," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 74(3), pages 791-819.
    9. Timothy Besley & Robin Burgess, 2004. "Can Labor Regulation Hinder Economic Performance? Evidence from India," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 119(1), pages 91-134.
    10. Trefler, Daniel, 1993. "International Factor Price Differences: Leontief Was Right!," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(6), pages 961-987, December.
    11. Devashish Mitra & Beyza Ural, 2009. "Indian manufacturing: A slow sector in a rapidly growing economy," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 205-205.
    12. Gupta, Poonam & Hasan, Rana & Kumar, Utsav, 2009. "Big Reforms but Small Payoffs: Explaining the Weak Record of Growth and Employment in Indian Manufacturing," MPRA Paper 13496, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Rana Hasan & Devashish Mitra & K.V. Ramaswamy, 2007. "Trade Reforms, Labor Regulations, and Labor-Demand Elasticities: Empirical Evidence from India," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(3), pages 466-481, August.
    14. Aditya Bhattacharjea, 2006. "Labour Market Regulation and Industrial Performance in India--A Critical Review of the Empirical Evidence," Working papers 141, Centre for Development Economics, Delhi School of Economics.
    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. Tooba Shojaie & Amir Mansour Tehranchian, 2018. "New Empirical Evidence on the Determinants of Capital Intensity: An Adaptive Comparison of Iran and China," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 8(2), pages 94-100.
    2. Popova, Svetlana & Karlova, Nataliya & Ponomarenko, Alexey & Deryugina, Elena, 2017. "Analysis of the debt burden in Russian economy sectors," Russian Journal of Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 379-410.
    3. Diti Goswami & Sourabh Bikas Paul, 2020. "Labor Reforms in Rajasthan: A boon or a bane?," Papers 2012.01016, arXiv.org.
    4. David Kunst, 2019. "Deskilling among Manufacturing Production Workers," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 19-050/VI, Tinbergen Institute, revised 30 Dec 2020.
    5. Borooah, Vani, 2019. "The Labour Market in India," MPRA Paper 101673, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Dario Simon Judzik & Hector Sala Lorda, 2014. "The determinants of capital intensity in Japan and the U.S," Working Papers wpdea1404, Department of Applied Economics at Universitat Autonoma of Barcelona.
    7. Judzik, Dario & Sala, Hector, 2015. "The determinants of capital intensity in Japan and the US," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 78-98.
    8. Asian Bank, 2018. "Asian Development Outlook (ADO) 2018: How Technology Affects Jobs," Working Papers id:12717, eSocialSciences.

    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:eee:wdevel:v:51:y:2013:i:c:p:91-103. 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: (Haili He). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/worlddev .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.