IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_1148.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Trade, Technology, and Productivity: A Study of Brazilian Manufacturers, 1986-1998

Author

Listed:
  • Marc-Andreas Muendler

Abstract

Brazil's trade liberalization between 1990 and 1993, and its partial reversal in 1995, are used to study how reduced inward trade barriers affect productivity. The production function of Brazilian manufacturers is estimated at the ISIC3 two-digit level under various alternatives, including an extension of Olley and Pakes' (1996) procedure. Firm-level productivity is inferred and then related to trade. Findings suggest that (1) foreign competition pressures firms to raise productivity markedly, whereas (2) the use of foreign inputs plays a minor role for productivity change. (3) The shutdown probability of inefficient firms rises with competition from abroad, thus contributing positively to aggregate productivity. Counterfactual simulations indicate that the competitive push (1) is an important source of immediate productivity change, while the elimination of inefficient firms (3) unfolds its impact slowly.

Suggested Citation

  • Marc-Andreas Muendler, 2004. "Trade, Technology, and Productivity: A Study of Brazilian Manufacturers, 1986-1998," CESifo Working Paper Series 1148, CESifo.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_1148
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ifo.de/DocDL/cesifo1_wp1148.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrew B. Bernard & J. Bradford Jensen & Peter K. Schott, 2003. "Falling Trade Costs, Heterogeneous Firms, and Industry Dynamics," Working Paper Series WP03-4, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    2. Keller, Wolfgang, 2000. "Do Trade Patterns and Technology Flows Affect Productivity Growth?," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 14(1), pages 17-47, January.
    3. Andrew B. Bernard & Jonathan Eaton & J. Bradford Jensen & Samuel Kortum, 2003. "Plants and Productivity in International Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(4), pages 1268-1290, September.
    4. Feenstra, Robert C & Markusen, James R, 1994. "Accounting for Growth with New Inputs," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 35(2), pages 429-447, May.
    5. Fernandes, Ana M., 2007. "Trade policy, trade volumes and plant-level productivity in Colombian manufacturing industries," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 52-71, March.
    6. Feenstra, Robert C & Markusen, James R & Zeile, William, 1992. "Accounting for Growth with New Inputs: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(2), pages 415-421, May.
    7. Thierry Magnac & David Thesmar, 2002. "Identifying Dynamic Discrete Decision Processes," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 801-816, March.
    8. Klette, Tor Jakob & Griliches, Zvi, 1996. "The Inconsistency of Common Scale Estimators When Output Prices Are Unobserved and Endogenous," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(4), pages 343-361, July-Aug..
    9. Levinsohn, James, 1993. "Testing the imports-as-market-discipline hypothesis," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1-2), pages 1-22, August.
    10. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "R&D and Productivity Growth: Comparing Japanese and U.S. Manufacturing Firms," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 187-210, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Pedro Cavalcanti Ferreira & JosÈ Luiz Rossi, 2003. "New Evidence from Brazil on Trade Liberalization and Productivity Growth," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 44(4), pages 1383-1405, November.
    12. Kim, Euysung, 2000. "Trade liberalization and productivity growth in Korean manufacturing industries: price protection, market power, and scale efficiency," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 55-83, June.
    13. Douglas Staiger & James H. Stock, 1997. "Instrumental Variables Regression with Weak Instruments," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(3), pages 557-586, May.
    14. Klaus M. Schmidt, 1997. "Managerial Incentives and Product Market Competition," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 64(2), pages 191-213.
    15. 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.
    16. Jeffrey D. Sachs & Andrew Warner, 1995. "Economic Reform and the Process of Global Integration," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 26(1, 25th A), pages 1-118.
    17. 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.
    18. Nickell, Stephen J, 1996. "Competition and Corporate Performance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(4), pages 724-746, August.
    19. Choi, E. Kwan & Harrigan, James, 2003. "Handbook of International Trade," Staff General Research Papers Archive 11375, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    20. James E. Rauch & Diana Weinhold, 1999. "Openness, Specialization, and Productivity Growth in Less Developed Countries," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 32(4), pages 1009-1027, August.
    21. Dan Ben-David, 1993. "Equalizing Exchange: Trade Liberalization and Income Convergence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(3), pages 653-679.
    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. repec:cdl:ucsdec:qt6m96c2r7 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Fernandes, Ana M., 2007. "Trade policy, trade volumes and plant-level productivity in Colombian manufacturing industries," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 52-71, March.
    3. Kasahara, Hiroyuki & Lapham, Beverly, 2013. "Productivity and the decision to import and export: Theory and evidence," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 297-316.
    4. Tarlok Singh, 2010. "Does International Trade Cause Economic Growth? A Survey," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(11), pages 1517-1564, November.
    5. Mary Amiti & Jozef Konings, 2007. "Trade Liberalization, Intermediate Inputs, and Productivity: Evidence from Indonesia," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(5), pages 1611-1638, December.
    6. Blalock, Garrick & Veloso, Francisco M., 2007. "Imports, Productivity Growth, and Supply Chain Learning," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 1134-1151, July.
    7. Ricardo A. López, 2005. "Trade and Growth: Reconciling the Macroeconomic and Microeconomic Evidence," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(4), pages 623-648, September.
    8. repec:cdl:ucsdec:qt0w02f5tw is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Schiantarelli, Fabio, 2005. "Product Market Regulation and Macroeconomic Performance: A Review of Cross Country Evidence," IZA Discussion Papers 1791, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    10. Marc-Andreas Muendler, 2004. "Estimating Production Functions When Productivity Change is Endogenous," CESifo Working Paper Series 1143, CESifo.
    11. Kasahara, Hiroyuki & Rodrigue, Joel, 2008. "Does the use of imported intermediates increase productivity? Plant-level evidence," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 106-118, August.
    12. Bruno Merlevede & Angelos Theodorakopoulos, 2016. "Productivity effects from inter-industry offshoring and inshoring: Firm-level evidence from Belgium," FIW Working Paper series 165, FIW.
    13. Asaftei, Gabriel & Parmeter, Christopher F., 2010. "Market power, EU integration and privatization: The case of Romania," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 340-356, September.
    14. Bena Jan & Ondko Peter & Vourvachaki Evangelia, 2011. "Productivity Gains from Services Liberalization in Europe," EERC Working Paper Series 11/15e, EERC Research Network, Russia and CIS.
    15. Frederic Warzynski & Jan De Loecker, 2010. "Markups and Firm-level Exports," 2010 Meeting Papers 438, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    16. Andrew B. Bernard & Stephen J. Redding & Peter K. Schott, 2011. "Multiproduct Firms and Trade Liberalization," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(3), pages 1271-1318.
    17. Jan De Loecker & Frederic Warzynski, 2012. "Markups and Firm-Level Export Status," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2437-2471, October.
    18. Hansen, Thorsten, 2010. "Tariff Rates, Offshoring and Productivity: Evidence from German and Austrian Firm-Level Data," Discussion Papers in Economics 11465, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    19. Harrison, Ann & Rodríguez-Clare, Andrés, 2010. "Trade, Foreign Investment, and Industrial Policy for Developing Countries," Handbook of Development Economics, in: Dani Rodrik & Mark Rosenzweig (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 4039-4214, Elsevier.
    20. Jan De Loecker & Pinelopi K. Goldberg & Amit K. Khandelwal & Nina Pavcnik, 2016. "Prices, Markups, and Trade Reform," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 84, pages 445-510, March.
    21. Jens Matthias Arnold & Katrin Hussinger, 2005. "Export Behavior and Firm Productivity in German Manufacturing: A Firm-Level Analysis," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 141(2), pages 219-243, July.
    22. 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

    JEL classification:

    • F14 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Empirical Studies of Trade
    • F43 - International Economics - - Macroeconomic Aspects of International Trade and Finance - - - Economic Growth of Open Economies

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ces:ceswps:_1148. 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.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.