IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/prs/ecstat/estat_0336-1454_1982_num_144_1_4611.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Crise et concentration du secteur productif

Author

Listed:
  • Michel Didier

Abstract

[spa] Crisis y concentración del sector productivo - En términos de numéro de personas empleadas, puede verificarse una tendencia secular de incremento del tamano de establecimientos y empresas. Dicha concentración se efectúa mis pronto a ralz del descenso del número de pequeñas unidades de producción que a consecuencia de la multiplicación de grandes unidades : en Francia, un 18% del empleo industrial se halla ocupado en establecimientos que contaban menos de diez asalariados en 1981, contra un 58% en 1906; mas al superar los diez asalariados, la distribución laboral por tamano de establecimiento permaneció poco mis o menos idéntica. No obstante, en tiempos de crisis (en los anos del treinta y a partir de 1973), las pequenas empresas recobraron un dinamismo contrapuesto a la aminoración del empleo. Esta reactivación por parte de pequeñas unidades se manifiesta en todos los sectores y por consiguiente no resulta únicamente de la alteración del aparato industrial por actividad económica. Las razones de dicho dinamismo parecen, hoy dia, duraderas y seria factible que rematen en una inversión de tendencia secular. [eng] The Crisis and the Concentration of the Production Sector - In terms of manpower, the century-old tendency has been towards an Increase in the size of businesses and firms. This concentration takes place more through the reduction in the number of small production units than through the multiplication of large ones : in France, 18% of industrial employment is in businesses having less than 10 employees, as against 58% in 1906; but for over 10 employees, the distribution of employment in terms of the size of the business has remained approximately the same. However, in a time of economic crisis (in the 30's and after 1973), small firms recover a dynamism which contrasts with the depressed job market. This recovery of small units is apparent in all sectors and thus is not merely the consequence of the deformation of the industrial system by economic activity. The reasons for this dynamism now seem to be lasting and could lead to a reversal of the century-old trend. [fre] En termes d'effectifs employés, on assiste à une tendance séculaire à l'augmentation de la taille des établissements et des entreprises. Cette concentration s'effectue davantage par la réduction du nombre des petites unités de production que par la multiplication des grandes : en France 18 % de l'emploi industriel est occupé dans des établissements de moins de 10 salariés en 1981, contre 58 % en 1906; mais au-dessus de 10 salariés la répartition de l'emploi par taille d'établissement est restée à peu près la même. Cependant, en période de crise (dans les années trente et à partir de 1973), les petites entreprises retrouvent un dynamisme qui tranche avec la dépression de l'emploi. Ce regain des petites unités de manifeste dans tous les secteurs et ne résulte donc pas seulement de la déformation de l'appareil industriel par activité économique. Les raisons de ce dynamisme semblent aujourd'hui durables et pourraient conduire à une inversion de la tendance séculaire.

Suggested Citation

  • Michel Didier, 1982. "Crise et concentration du secteur productif," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 144(1), pages 3-12.
  • Handle: RePEc:prs:ecstat:estat_0336-1454_1982_num_144_1_4611
    DOI: 10.3406/estat.1982.4611
    Note: DOI:10.3406/estat.1982.4611
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.3406/estat.1982.4611
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.persee.fr/doc/estat_0336-1454_1982_num_144_1_4611
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3406/estat.1982.4611?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Link, Albert N, 1980. "Firm Size and Efficient Entrepreneurial Activity: A Reformulation of the Schumpeter Hypothesis," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 88(4), pages 771-782, August.
    2. Pryor, Frederic L, 1972. "Size of Establishments in Manufacturing," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 82(326), pages 547-566, June.
    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. Cécile Le Corroller & Fabrice Le Vigoureux, 1998. "Les moyennes entreprises de l'industrie ont-elles des comportements spécifiques ?," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 319(1), pages 195-205.
    2. Sophie Lecostey, 1992. "Incertitude, concurrence entre grandes et petites firmes et altération de la relation structure-performance," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 102(1), pages 11-25.
    3. Mathilde Aubry & Jean Bonnet & Patricia Renou-Maissant, 2013. "Business cycle and entrepreneurial behavior using French regional data," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes 1 & University of Caen) 201304, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes 1, University of Caen and CNRS.
    4. Jean Bonnet & Patricia Renou-Maissant, 2000. "La régulation macro-économique et sectorielle de la démographie d'entreprises," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 145(4), pages 19-40.
    5. Aglietta, Michel & Boyer Robert, 1982. "Poles de compétitivité, stratégie industrielle et politique macroéconomique," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Couverture Orange) 8223, CEPREMAP.

    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. Nguyen, Sang V. & Kokkelenberg, Edward C., 1990. "Measuring Total Factor Productivity, Technical Change and the Rate of Returns to Research and Development," Working Papers 179215, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    2. A. Moschonas & V. Droucopoulos, 1993. "Small and Medium-Scale Industry In Greece: Oasis of Dynamism or Symptom of Malaise?," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 25(2), pages 108-131, June.
    3. Konstantinos Konstantakis & Panayotis G. Michaelides & Theofanis Papageorgiou, 2014. "Sector size, technical change and stability in the USA (1957-2006): a Schumpeterian approach," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 41(10), pages 956-974, October.
    4. Chuchu Chen & Albert N. Link & Zachary T. Oliver, 2018. "U.S. federal laboratories and their research partners: a quantitative case study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 501-517, April.
    5. Nikolay Chernyshev, 2017. "The Relationship between R&D and Competition: Reconciling Theory and Evidence," CDMA Working Paper Series 201704, Centre for Dynamic Macroeconomic Analysis.
    6. Cristiano Antonelli & Alessandra Colombelli, 2018. "The cost of knowledge," Chapters, in: The Evolutionary Complexity of Endogenous Innovation, chapter 6, pages 128-150, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. David Audretsch & Erik Lehmann, 2006. "Do locational spillovers pay? empirical evidence from German IPO data," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 71-81.
    8. Jeremy W. Bray & Albert N. Link, 2017. "Dynamic entrepreneurship: On the performance of U.S. research joint ventures," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 49(4), pages 785-797, December.
    9. Sumit Majumdar, 2011. "Scalability versus flexibility: firm size and R&D in Indian industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 101-116, February.
    10. Cristiano Antonelli & Giuseppe Scellato, 2011. "Out-of-equilibrium profit and innovation," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(5), pages 405-421.
    11. Dennis Leyden & Albert Link, 2015. "Toward a theory of the entrepreneurial process," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 475-484, March.
    12. George Bitros, 2005. "Scale, Scope and Entrepreneurship," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Youssef Cassis & Ioanna Pepelasis Minoglou (ed.), Entrepreneurship in Theory and History, chapter 3, pages 61-76, Palgrave Macmillan.
    13. Albert N. Link & John T. Scott, 2018. "Propensity to Patent and Firm Size for Small R&D-Intensive Firms," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 52(4), pages 561-587, June.
    14. Chia Lin, CHANG & Stephane, ROBIN, 2004. "Doing R&D and Importing Technology : an Empirical Investigation on Taiwan’s manufacturing firms," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2004006, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    15. Berghäll, Elina, 2006. "Technical Change, Efficiency, Firm Size and Age in an RD Intensive Sector," Discussion Papers 390, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    16. Daniel F. Spulber, 2013. "How Do Competitive Pressures Affect Incentives to Innovate When There Is a Market for Inventions?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 121(6), pages 1007-1054.
    17. George C. Bitros & Anastassios D. Karayiannis, 2004. "The liberating power of entrepreneurship in ancient Athens," Method and Hist of Econ Thought 0411004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Del Canto, Jesus Galende & Gonzalez, Isabel Suarez, 1999. "A resource-based analysis of the factors determining a firm's R&D activities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(8), pages 891-905, November.
    19. Antonelli, Cristiano & Colombelli, Alessandra, 2015. "The knowledge cost function," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 290-302.
    20. Hall, Michael J. & Layson, Stephen K. & Link, Albert N., 2013. "The Division of Policy Research and Analysis at the National Science Foundation: Its Support of Research on the Returns to R&D," UNCG Economics Working Papers 13-6, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    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:prs:ecstat:estat_0336-1454_1982_num_144_1_4611. 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: Equipe PERSEE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.persee.fr/collection/estat .

    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.