IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Bias in the ‘Proportionality Assumption’ Used in the Measurement of Offshoring

  • Deborah Winkler
  • William Milberg

Most studies of offshoring rely on a 'proportionality assumption' where every sector is assumed to import each material and service input in the same proportion as its economy-wide use. We assess the bias resulting from this assumption. Since Germany collects imported inputs directly, we are able to compare the direct and proxy measures, where the proxy is constructed with the proportionality assumption. The proxy fails to accurately capture the variation in services offshoring intensity because - as a result of the proportionality assumption - it is strongly influenced by the variation in demand for domestic inputs. Estimation of the effect of offshoring on labour demand for 35 manufacturing sectors in Germany over 1995-2006 shows that the direct and proxy-based measures of services offshoring give very different results. The implication goes beyond the case of Germany: researchers must be cautious about drawing policy conclusions from estimates using the proxy of offshoring.

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: no

Article provided by World Economics, Economic & Financial Publishing, 1 Ivory Square, Plantation Wharf, London, United Kingdom, SW11 3UE in its journal World Economics Journal.

Volume (Year): 13 (2012)
Issue (Month): 4 (October)
Pages: 39-60

in new window

Handle: RePEc:wej:wldecn:536
Contact details of provider:

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

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:wej:wldecn:536. 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: (Ed Jones)

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.