IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joevec/v24y2014i5p1009-1036.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The significance of structural transformation to productivity growth

Author

Listed:
  • Jacob Holm

    ()

Abstract

This paper critically discusses the most common methodology for decomposing productivity change into inter- and intra-firm effects. It is argued that the methodology can be improved to explicitly take the role of structural transformation into account, and by so doing, a potential source of bias in the results is corrected. This requires the use of a tool from the field of theoretical evolutionary biology: Price’s equation. A review of a sample of studies that apply decomposition analyses shows that the methodology is best suited for studies of the evolution of labour productivity and the reallocation of labour. Based on Danish data for 1992–2010, it is then demonstrated how the results of decomposition analyses can be considerably improved by the explicit inclusion of levels in the selection process. In the specific analysis conducted by the current paper, economic selection among industries is included. It is found that the structural transformation of the economy has a large impact on the results of decomposition studies, not least on the magnitude of the inter-firm selection effect. Structural transformation from capital-intensive and thus high-labour-productivity manufacturing towards labour-intensive and thus low-labour-productivity services entails that the traditional methodology is biased downwards in its measure of economic selection. Finally, it is demonstrated that the length of the interval studied, while often determined by data limitations, has a significant but predictable effect on the results, and it is tentatively demonstrated that economic selection tends to be stronger in the trough of the business cycle. Copyright Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Jacob Holm, 2014. "The significance of structural transformation to productivity growth," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 24(5), pages 1009-1036, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:joevec:v:24:y:2014:i:5:p:1009-1036
    DOI: 10.1007/s00191-014-0380-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s00191-014-0380-6
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Jens J. Krüger, 2008. "The Sources Of Aggregate Productivity Growth: Us Manufacturing Industries, 1958–1996," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(4), pages 405-427, October.
    2. Giulio Bottazzi & Giovanni Dosi & Nadia Jacoby & Angelo Secchi & Federico Tamagni, 2010. "Corporate performances and market selection: some comparative evidence," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(6), pages 1953-1996, December.
    3. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 51-127, Elsevier.
    4. Richard Disney & Jonathan Haskel & Ylva Heden, 2003. "Restructuring and productivity growth in uk manufacturing," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(489), pages 666-694, July.
    5. Metcalfe, J S, 1994. "Competition, Fisher's Principle and Increasing Returns in the Selection Process," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 4(4), pages 327-346, November.
    6. Lucia Foster & John Haltiwanger & C.J. Krizan, 2002. "The Link Between Aggregate and Micro Productivity Growth: Evidence from Retail Trade," NBER Working Papers 9120, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Baldwin,John R. & Gorecki,Paul With contributions by-Name:Caves,Richard E. With contributions by-Name:Dunne,Tim With contributions by-Name:Haltiwanger,John, 1998. "The Dynamics of Industrial Competition," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521633574.
      • Baldwin,John R. & Gorecki,Paul With contributions by-Name:Caves,Richard E. With contributions by-Name:Dunne,Tim With contributions by-Name:Haltiwanger,John, 1995. "The Dynamics of Industrial Competition," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521465618.
    8. Coad, Alex, 2007. "Testing the principle of `growth of the fitter': The relationship between profits and firm growth," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 370-386, September.
    9. Chad Syverson, 2011. "What Determines Productivity?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 49(2), pages 326-365, June.
    10. Lucia Foster & John Haltiwanger & Chad Syverson, 2008. "Reallocation, Firm Turnover, and Efficiency: Selection on Productivity or Profitability?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(1), pages 394-425, March.
    11. Eric Bartelsman & Andrea Bassanini & John Haltiwanger & Ron Jarmin & Stefano Scarpetta & Thorsten Schank, 2002. "The Spread of ICT and Productivity Growth: Is Europe Really Lagging Behind in the New Economy?," CEPN Working Papers halshs-00289168, HAL.
    12. 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.
    13. Uwe Cantner & Jens Krüger, 2008. "Micro-heterogeneity and aggregate productivity development in the German manufacturing sector," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 119-133, April.
    14. Jovanovic, Boyan, 1982. "Selection and the Evolution of Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(3), pages 649-670, May.
    15. John Metcalfe, 2008. "Accounting for economic evolution: Fitness and the population method," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 23-49, April.
    16. Richard E. Caves, 1998. "Industrial Organization and New Findings on the Turnover and Mobility of Firms," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(4), pages 1947-1982, December.
    17. Alex Coad & Mercedes Teruel, 2013. "Inter-firm rivalry and firm growth: is there any evidence of direct competition between firms?," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 22(2), pages 397-425, April.
    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. Uwe Cantner & Holger Graf & Ekaterina Prytkova & Simone Vannuccini, 2018. "The Compositional Nature of Productivity and Innovation Slowdown," Jena Economic Research Papers 2018-006, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    2. Matteo Deleidi & Walter Paternesi Meloni & Antonella Stirati, 2020. "Tertiarization, productivity and aggregate demand: evidence-based policies for European countries," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1429-1465, November.
    3. Jacob Rubæk Holm & Esben Sloth Andersen & J. Stanley Metcalfe, 2016. "Confounded, augmented and constrained replicator dynamics," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 803-822, October.

    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. Andrew B. Bernard & Stephen J. Redding & Peter K. Schott, 2009. "Products and Productivity," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 111(4), pages 681-709, December.
    2. Carlos Carreira & Paulino Teixeira, 2016. "Entry and exit in severe recessions: lessons from the 2008–2013 Portuguese economic crisis," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 591-617, April.
    3. Ouyang, Min, 2009. "The scarring effect of recessions," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 184-199, March.
    4. Hyytinen, Ari & Maliranta, Mika, 2013. "Firm lifecycles and evolution of industry productivity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1080-1098.
    5. Esben Andersen & Jacob Holm, 2014. "The signs of change in economic evolution," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 291-316, April.
    6. Jens Krüger, 2014. "Intrasectoral structural change and aggregate productivity development: robust stochastic nonparametric frontier function estimates," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 1545-1572, June.
    7. A. Arrighetti & F. Landini & A. Lasagni, 2016. "Swimming Upstream Throughout the Turmoil: Evidence on Firm Growth During the Great Recession," Economics Department Working Papers 2016-EP04, Department of Economics, Parma University (Italy).
    8. Giovanni Dosi & Sébastien Lechevalier & Angelo Secchi, 2010. "Interfirm heterogeneity: nature, sources and consequences for industrial dynamics. An introduction," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-00642680, HAL.
    9. Luna, Ivette & Hiratuka, Celio & Haddad Netto, Elias Youssef, 2016. "Survival of the fittest or does size matter: What are the main drivers of Productivity in Brazil?," MPRA Paper 78208, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2016.
    10. Werner Hölzl, 2015. "Sunk costs and the speed of market selection," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 323-344, April.
    11. Andrew B. Bernard & Stephen J. Redding & Peter K. Schott, 2006. "Multi-Product Firms and Product Switching," NBER Working Papers 12293, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. de Backer, Koen & Sleuwaegen, Leo, 2003. "Foreign ownership and productivity dynamics," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 177-183, May.
    13. Giulio Bottazzi & Giovanni Dosi & Nadia Jacoby & Angelo Secchi & Federico Tamagni, 2010. "Corporate performances and market selection: some comparative evidence," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(6), pages 1953-1996, December.
    14. Andreas Pyka & Uwe Cantner & Alfred Greiner & Thomas Kuhn (ed.), 2009. "Recent Advances in Neo-Schumpeterian Economics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 12982.
    15. Michele Cincera, 2004. "Impact of market entry and exit on EU productivity and growth performance," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/921, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    16. 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, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    17. Giovanni Dosi & Daniele Moschella & Emanuele Pugliese & Federico Tamagni, 2015. "Productivity, market selection, and corporate growth: comparative evidence across US and Europe," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 643-672, October.
    18. Alex Coad & Tom Broekel, 2012. "Firm growth and productivity growth: evidence from a panel VAR," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(10), pages 1251-1269, April.
    19. Alex Coad, 2007. "Firm Growth : a Survey," Post-Print halshs-00155762, HAL.
    20. Florin Maican & Matilda Orth, 2017. "Productivity Dynamics and the Role of ‘Big-Box’ Entrants in Retailing," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(2), pages 397-438, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Structural change; Productivity growth; Price’s equation; Economic selection; Business cycle; L16; O47; B52;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L16 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Industrial Organization and Macroeconomics; Macroeconomic Industrial Structure
    • O47 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - Empirical Studies of Economic Growth; Aggregate Productivity; Cross-Country Output Convergence
    • B52 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Current Heterodox Approaches - - - Historical; Institutional; Evolutionary; Modern Monetary Theory;

    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:spr:joevec:v:24:y:2014:i:5:p:1009-1036. 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: (Sonal Shukla) or (Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.