IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Impacts of Industry Mix, Technological Change, Selection and Plant Entry/Exit on Regional Productivity Growth

Listed author(s):
  • David Rigby
  • Jurgen Essletzbichler
Registered author(s):

    RIGBY D. L. and ESSLETZBICHLER J. (2000) Impacts of industry mix, technological change, selection and plant entry/exit on regional productivity growth, Reg. Studies 34 , 333-342. In this paper we identify five sources of regional productivity growth: changes in industry mix; technological change by incumbent plants; selection, or changes in plant market shares; plant entry; and plant exit. These sources of productivity change are measured for US states over the period 1963 to 1992. The geography of productivity change is shown to be complex; the absolute and relative size of the components of change vary considerably between regions and over time. Contrary to simplistic accounts that view productivity improvement solely as the result of technological change, we reveal that in a number of states efficiency gains within incumbent plants are overwhelmed by other sources of productivity growth. In addition, we show that rates of plant entry and plant exit are significantly higher in the sunbelt states of the south and west of the US than in the snowbelt. Plant turnover is lower than average in the traditional manufacturing belt of the US. Plants in this region are more likely to be incumbents, and thus longer-lived, than elsewhere. RIGBY D. L. et ESSLETZBICHLER J. (2000) Les retombees de la structure industrielle, du progres technologique, de la selection et de l'entree/la sortie des etablissements sur la croissance regionale de la productivite, Reg. Studies 34 , 333- 342. Cet article cherche a identifier cinq composantes de la croissance de la productivite regionale: ¤ a savoir, le changement de la structure industrielle; le progres technologique des etablissements dej ¤ a implantes dans la region; la selection, ou le changement de la part de marche des etablissement; l'entree des etablissements; la sortie des etablissements. Ces composantes du changement de la productivite sont estimees pour les Etats-Unis sur la periode de 1963 ¤ a 1992. La geographie du changement de la productivite s'avere complexe: l'importance absolue et relative des composantes varie sensiblement suivant la region et sur le temps. Contrairement aux comptes-rendus simplistes qui ne considerent la croissance de la productivite que le resultat des avancees technologiques, on laisse voir que dans de nombreux Etats les gains de rendement des etablissements dej ¤ a implante ´s dans la region se voient depasser par d'autres composantes de la croissance de la productivite. Qui plus est, on demontre que l'entree et la sortie des etablissements sont nettement plus frequentes dans les Etats du Sud et de l'Ouest des Etats-Unis qu'elles ne le sont dans les Etats qui connaissent des hivers rigoureux. Dans lesdits Etats industriels, le taux de renouvellement des etablissements s'avere en-dessous de la moyenne. Les etablissements situes dans ces regions sont plus susceptibles d'etre des etablissements dej ¤ a implantes, et par la suite plus anciens, qu'ailleurs. RIGBY D. L. und ESSLETZBICHLER J. (2000) Auswirkungen von Branchenstruktur der Industrie, technologische Umstellung, Auswahl und Betriebseroffnungen/Schliessungen auf den Zuwachs regionaler Produktivitat, Reg. Studies 34 , 333-342. In diesem Aufsatz werden funf Ursachen regionaler Produktivitatszunahme identifiziert: Veranderungen in der Branchenstruktur der Industrie; technologische Umstellung in vorhandenen Betrieben; Auswahl, oder Veranderungen in den Marktanteilen der Betriebe; Betriebseroffnungen; und Betriebsschliessungen. Diese Ursachen des Produktivitatswandels im Zeitraum 1963-92 werden fur Mitgliedstaaten der USA gemessen. Die Geographie des Produktivitatswandels erweist sich als komplex: absolute und relative Grosse der Bestandteile des Wandels schwanken betrachtlich, sowohl von Region zu Region als auch im Laufe der Zeit. Im Gegensatz zu simplistischen Darstellungen, die Verbesserungen der Produktivitat rein als Ergebnis technologischer Umstellungen ansehen, wird hier aufgezeigt, dass in einer Anzahl von Staaten Leistungsanstiege in vorhandenen Betrieben durchaus hinter anderen Ursachen der Produktionszunahme zurucktreten. Daruberhinaus wird gezeigt, dass die Raten der Betriebseroffnungen und Betriebsschliessungen in den sonnigeren Breiten des Sudens und Westens bedeutend hoher waren als in den schneereicheren Breiten der USA, in denen industrielle Herstellung schon immer eine Rolle gespielt hat, ist der Betriebsumsatz geringer als der Durchschnitt. In Betrieben dieser Regionen ist es wahrscheinlicher, dass sie Geschaftsinhaber und deshalb langlebiger als anderswo sind.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Regional Studies.

    Volume (Year): 34 (2000)
    Issue (Month): 4 ()
    Pages: 333-342

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:taf:regstd:v:34:y:2000:i:4:p:333-342
    DOI: 10.1080/00343400050078114
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Web:

    References listed on IDEAS
    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.:

    in new window

    1. Sala-i-Martin, Xavier X, 1996. "The Classical Approach to Convergence Analysis," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(437), pages 1019-1036, July.
    2. Kollmann, Robert, 1995. "The correlation of productivity growth across regions and industries in the United States," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 47(3-4), pages 437-443, March.
    3. R. E. Caves & M. E. Porter, 1977. "From Entry Barriers to Mobility Barriers: Conjectural Decisions and Contrived Deterrence to New Competition," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 91(2), pages 241-261.
    4. Baumol, William J & Wolff, Edward N, 1988. "Productivity Growth, Convergence, and Welfare: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(5), pages 1155-1159, December.
    5. J. Bradford Jensen & Robert H. McGuckin & Kevin J. Stiroh, 2001. "The Impact Of Vintage And Survival On Productivity: Evidence From Cohorts Of U.S. Manufacturing Plants," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(2), pages 323-332, May.
    6. Robert J. Barro, 1991. "Economic Growth in a Cross Section of Countries," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 106(2), pages 407-443.
    7. Quah, Danny T, 1996. "Twin Peaks: Growth and Convergence in Models of Distribution Dynamics," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(437), pages 1045-1055, July.
    8. Dunne, Timothy & Roberts, Mark J & Samuelson, Larry, 1989. "Plant Turnover and Gross Employment Flows in the U.S. Manufacturing Sector," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 7(1), pages 48-71, January.
    9. Baldwin,John R. & Gorecki,Paul, 1998. "The Dynamics of Industrial Competition," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521633574, March.
    10. Olley, G Steven & Pakes, Ariel, 1996. "The Dynamics of Productivity in the Telecommunications Equipment Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(6), pages 1263-1297, November.
    11. Bernard, Andrew B & Jones, Charles I, 1996. "Technology and Convergence," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(437), pages 1037-1044, July.
    12. Fogarty, Michael S. & Garofalo, Gasper A., 1988. "Urban spatial structure and productivity growth in the manufacturing sector of cities," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 60-70, January.
    13. Baldwin, John R. & Rafiquzzaman, Mohammed, 1995. "Selection versus evolutionary adaptation: Learning and post-entry performance," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 501-522, December.
    14. Mark E Doms, 1993. "Inter Fuel Substitution And Energy Technology Heterogeneity In U.S. Manufacturing," Working Papers 93-5, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    15. Richard E. Caves, 1997. "Industrial Organization and New Findings on the Turnover and Mobility of Firms," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1808, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
    16. Geroski, P. A., 1995. "What do we know about entry?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 421-440, December.
    17. Robert H Mcguckin & George A Pascoe, 1988. "The Longitudinal Research Database (LRD): Status And Research Possibilities," Working Papers 88-2, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    18. 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.
    19. Mark Doms & Eric J. Bartelsman, 2000. "Understanding Productivity: Lessons from Longitudinal Microdata," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(3), pages 569-594, September.
    20. Baumol, William J, 1986. "Productivity Growth, Convergence, and Welfare: What the Long-run Data Show," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 1072-1085, December.
    21. Doms, Mark & Dunne, Timothy & Roberts, Mark J., 1995. "The role of technology use in the survival and growth of manufacturing plants," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 523-542, December.
    22. Danny Quah, 1996. "Twin Peaks: Growth and Convergence in Models of Distribution Dynamics," CEP Discussion Papers dp0280, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    23. Patricia E. Beeson & Steven Husted, 1986. "Patterns and determinants of inefficiency in state manufacturing," Working Paper 8603, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:regstd:v:34:y:2000:i:4:p:333-342. 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: (Chris Longhurst)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.