Gibrat's Law and Market Selection in the Radio, TV & Telecommunications Equipment Industry
According to Gibrat’s Law of Proportionate Effect, the growth rate of a given firm is independent of its size at the beginning of the period examined. In contrast to the previous literature on the subject, this paper seeks to test the Law by taking account of both the entry process and the role of survival/failure in reshaping a given population of firms over time. It does so by focusing on the entire population of firms (including newborn ones) in the Italian Radio, TV & Telecommunications equipment industry and tracking them over seven years. Consistently with the previous literature, it finds that - in general - Gibrat’s Law is to be rejected, since smaller firms tend to grow faster than their larger counterparts. However, the paper’s main finding is that this rejection of Gibrat’s Law may be due to market dynamics and selection. In other words, it is due to the entry process and the presence of transient smaller firms. Indeed, whilst it is found that Gibrat’s Law has to be rejected over a seven year period during which both incumbent and newborn firms are considered, for both sub-populations of surviving firms a convergence towards Gibrat-like behavior over time can be detected. Thus, market selection “cleans” the original population of firms and the resulting industrial “core” (mature, larger, well-established and most efficient firms) does not seem to depart from a Gibrat-like pattern of growth.
|Date of creation:||2003|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Piazza Scaravilli, 2, and Strada Maggiore, 45, 40125 Bologna|
Phone: +39 051 209 8019 and 2600
Fax: +39 051 209 8040 and 2664
Web page: http://www.dse.unibo.it
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Barbara Roberts & Steve Thompson, 2003. "Entry and Exit in a Transition Economy: The Case of Poland," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 22(3), pages 225-243, May.
- Heshmati, Almas, 2000. "On the Growth of Micro and Small Firms," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 396, Stockholm School of Economics.
- Stephen Hymer & Peter Pashigian, 1962. "Firm Size and Rate of Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 70, pages 556-556.
- Heckman, James, 2013.
"Sample selection bias as a specification error,"
Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
- Heckman, James J, 1979. "Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(1), pages 153-161, January.
- Geroski, Paul A, 1999. "The Growth of Firms in Theory and in Practice," CEPR Discussion Papers 2092, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Chesher, Andrew, 1979. "Testing the Law of Proportionate Effect," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 403-411, June.
- Klepper, Steven & Miller, John H., 1995. "Entry, exit, and shakeouts in the United States in new manufactured products," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 567-591, December.
- Maria Letizia Giorgetti, 2003. "Lower Bound Estimation - Quantile Regression and Simplex Method: An Application to Italian Manufacturing Sectors," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 113-120, 03.
- Francesca Lotti & Enrico Santarelli & Marco Vivarelli, 2003. "Does Gibrat's Law hold among young, small firms?," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 213-235, August.
- Almus, Matthias & Nerlinger, Eric A, 2000. "Testing "Gibrat's Law" for Young Firms--Empirical Results for West Germany," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 1-12, August.
- Jovanovic, Boyan, 1982. "Selection and the Evolution of Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(3), pages 649-670, May.
- Pakes, Ariel & Ericson, Richard, 1998. "Empirical Implications of Alternative Models of Firm Dynamics," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 1-45, March.
- Ariel Pakes & Richard Ericson, 1989. "Empirical Implications of Alternative Models of Firm Dynamics," NBER Working Papers 2893, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Pakes, A. & Ericson, R., 1990. "Empirical Implications Of Alternative Models Of Firm Dynamics," Papers 594, Yale - Economic Growth Center.
- Fotopoulos, Georgios & Louri-Dendrinou, Eleni, 2002. "Corporate Growth and FDI: Are Multinationals Stimulating Local Industrial Development?," CEPR Discussion Papers 3128, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bol:bodewp:478. 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: (Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.