IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ris/actuec/0014.html

Le mécanisme de sélection des firmes est-il efficace? Une approche en termes de coût d’opportunité

Author

Listed:
  • Asma Raies

    (CED-TEAM, Université de Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne)

  • Mohamed Ben Mimoun

    (CED-TEAM, Université de Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne)

Abstract

The recent literature has always attributed to the natural selection mechanism – along which only efficient firms can survive while inefficient ones are eliminated by market competition – a crucial role in the aggregated efficiency growth. By assuming that firms differ not only by their efficiency levels but by their opportunity costs too, our model shows that the selection mechanism can reduce aggregated efficiency especially when exiting firms are the most efficient ones. Our model also shows that both efficient and inefficient firms can coexist in the stationary equilibrium. This result can interpret some empirical findings such as the persistence of inefficient firms and the high dispersion of firms’ efficiency levels. Résumé : La littérature récente a toujours attribué au phénomène dit de « sélection naturelle » – selon lequel, seules les firmes les plus efficientes survivent alors que les autres sont éliminées par le jeu de la concurrence – un rôle crucial dans la croissance de l’efficience agrégée. En supposant, dans le cadre d’un modèle théorique que les firmes différent non seulement par leurs niveaux d’efficience mais aussi par leurs valeurs de réservation, nous montrons ici que le rôle du mécanisme de sélection dans la croissance de l’efficience agrégée peut être remis en cause notamment lorsque les sortants sont plutôt les firmes les plus efficientes. Un autre résultat important consiste à montrer, qu’à l’équilibre stationnaire, les firmes efficientes et inefficientes peuvent coexister. Ce faisant, le modèle développé permet de rendre compte de la persistance des firmes inefficientes et de la grande dispersion des niveaux d’efficience constatée dans plusieurs études empiriques.

Suggested Citation

  • Asma Raies & Mohamed Ben Mimoun, 2009. "Le mécanisme de sélection des firmes est-il efficace? Une approche en termes de coût d’opportunité," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 85(2), pages 183-207.
  • Handle: RePEc:ris:actuec:0014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.erudit.org/revue/ae/2009/v85/n2/044253ar.html
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James R. Tybout, 2000. "Manufacturing Firms in Developing Countries: How Well Do They Do, and Why?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(1), pages 11-44, March.
    2. Marcus Asplund & Volker Nocke, 2006. "Firm Turnover in Imperfectly Competitive Markets -super-1," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 73(2), pages 295-327.
    3. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/7186 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Francisco Ruiz-Aliseda, 2003. "Strategic Commitment Versus Flexibility in a Duopoly with Entry and Exit," Discussion Papers 1379, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    5. Boyan Jovanovic, 1982. "Favorable Selection with Asymmetric Information," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 97(3), pages 535-539.
    6. Douglas W Dwyer, 1995. "Technology Locks, Creative Destruction And Non-Convergence In Productivity Levels," Working Papers 95-6, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    7. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/7185 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Flora Bellone & Patrick Musso & Michel Quéré & Lionel Nesta, 2006. "Productivity and Market Selection of French Manufacturing Firms in the Nineties," Revue de l'OFCE, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 97(5), pages 319-349.
    9. Phoebus J Dhrymes, 1991. "The Structure Of Production Technology Productivity And Aggregation Effects," Working Papers 91-5, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    10. Douglas W Dwyer, 1997. "Productivity Races I: Are Some Productivuty Measures Better Than Others?," Working Papers 97-2, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    11. Richard Ericson & Ariel Pakes, 1995. "Markov-Perfect Industry Dynamics: A Framework for Empirical Work," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 62(1), pages 53-82.
    12. Hopenhayn, Hugo & Rogerson, Richard, 1993. "Job Turnover and Policy Evaluation: A General Equilibrium Analysis," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(5), pages 915-938, October.
    13. Marc J. Melitz, 2003. "The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(6), pages 1695-1725, November.
    14. Hopenhayn, Hugo A, 1992. "Entry, Exit, and Firm Dynamics in Long Run Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(5), pages 1127-1150, September.
    15. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/7185 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/7186 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Lucia Foster & John C. Haltiwanger & C. J. Krizan, 2001. "Aggregate Productivity Growth: Lessons from Microeconomic Evidence," NBER Chapters, in: New Developments in Productivity Analysis, pages 303-372, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Markus Poschke, 2010. "The Regulation of Entry and Aggregate Productivity," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 120(549), pages 1175-1200, December.
    3. Marco Mariani & Elena Pirani & Elena Radicchi, 2013. "La sopravvivenza delle imprese negli anni della crisi: prime evidenze empiriche dalla Toscana," ECONOMIA E POLITICA INDUSTRIALE, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2013(1), pages 25-52.
    4. Cristina Fernández & Roberta García & Paloma Lopez-Garcia & Benedicta Marzinotto & Roberta Serafini & Juuso Vanhala & Ladislav Wintr, 2017. "Firm growth in Europe: An overview based on the COMPNET labour module," BCL working papers 107, Central Bank of Luxembourg.
    5. Viktoria Kocsis & Victoria Shestalova & Henry van der Wiel & Nick Zubanov & Ruslan Lukach & Bert Minne, 2009. "Relation entry, exit and productivity: an overview of recent theoretical and empirical literature," CPB Document 180.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    6. Bianchini, Stefano & Pellegrino, Gabriele, 2019. "Innovation persistence and employment dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1171-1186.
    7. Carol Newman & Gaia Narciso & Finn Tarp & Vu Xuan Nguyet Hong, 2009. "The Role of Technology, Investment and Ownership Structure in the Productivity Performance of the Manufacturing Sector in Vietnam," Trinity Economics Papers tep0109, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
    8. Jiang, Zheng & Shi, Huimin, 2016. "The selection of firms based on productivity: different roles of entry and overhead cost," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 537-544.
    9. Tran, Hien Thu, 2019. "Institutional quality and market selection in the transition to market economy," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1-1.
    10. Kersting, Stefan & Hüttel, Silke & Odening, Martin, 2015. "Structural change in agriculture under capacity constraints: An equilibrium approach," Thuenen-Series of Applied Economic Theory 140, University of Rostock, Institute of Economics.
    11. Lucia Foster & John Haltiwanger & Chad Syverson, 2016. "The Slow Growth of New Plants: Learning about Demand?," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 83(329), pages 91-129, January.
    12. A. Kerem Co?ar & Nezih Guner & James Tybout, 2016. "Firm Dynamics, Job Turnover, and Wage Distributions in an Open Economy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(3), pages 625-663, March.
    13. Eslava, Marcela & Haltiwanger, John C. & Kugler, Adriana & Kugler, Maurice, 2009. "Trade Reforms and Market Selection: Evidence from Manufacturing Plants in Colombia," IZA Discussion Papers 4256, IZA Network @ LISER.
    14. Rene Söllner, 2010. "Product Diversification and Labor Productivity Dispersion in German Manufacturing Industries," Jena Economics Research Papers 2010-028, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    15. Eslava, Marcela & Haltiwanger, John & Kugler, Adriana & Kugler, Maurice, 2004. "The effects of structural reforms on productivity and profitability enhancing reallocation: evidence from Colombia," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 333-371, December.
    16. 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.
    17. Marcela Eslava & John Haltiwanger & Adriana Kugler & Maurice Kugler, 2013. "Trade and Market Selection: Evidence from Manufacturing Plants in Colombia," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 16(1), pages 135-158, January.
    18. Hu, Zhongzhong & Rodrigue, Joel & Tan, Yong & Yu, Chunhai, 2017. "Product churning, reallocation, and Chinese export growth," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 147-164.
    19. Adlakha, Sachin & Johari, Ramesh & Weintraub, Gabriel Y., 2015. "Equilibria of dynamic games with many players: Existence, approximation, and market structure," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 269-316.
    20. Wen-jhan Jane & Wei-peng Chen & Yuan-lin Hsu, 2015. "The impact of deregulation on the movie box office after Taiwan’s entry into the WTO: the difference-in-differences estimation," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 5(2), pages 289-308, December.

    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:ris:actuec:0014. 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: Benoit Dostie The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Benoit Dostie to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/scseeea.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.