IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fip/fedgif/788.html

How does the border affect productivity? evidence from American and Canadian manufacturing industries

Author

Abstract

This paper studies how much of productivity fluctuations are industry specific versus how much are country specific. Using data on manufacturing industries in Canada and the United States, the paper shows that the correlation between cross-border pairings of the same industry are more often highly correlated than previously thought. In addition, the paper confirms earlier findings that the similarity of input use can help describe the co-movement of productivity fluctuations across industries.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert J. Vigfusson, 2003. "How does the border affect productivity? evidence from American and Canadian manufacturing industries," International Finance Discussion Papers 788, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedgif:788
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/ifdp/2003/788/default.htm
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/ifdp/2003/788/ifdp788.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. George W. Stadler, 1994. "Real Business Cycles," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 32(4), pages 1750-1783, December.
    2. Miles S. Kimball & John G. Fernald & Susanto Basu, 2006. "Are Technology Improvements Contractionary?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1418-1448, December.
    3. Basu, Susanto & Fernald, John G., 1995. "Are apparent productive spillovers a figment of specification error?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 165-188, August.
    4. Christiano, Lawrence J. & Eichenbaum, Martin & Evans, Charles L., 1999. "Monetary policy shocks: What have we learned and to what end?," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & M. Woodford (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 2, pages 65-148, Elsevier.
    5. John F. Helliwell, 1996. "Do National Borders Matter for Quebec's Trade?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 29(3), pages 507-522, August.
    6. Susanto Basu & John Fernald, 2001. "Why Is Productivity Procyclical? Why Do We Care?," NBER Chapters, in: New Developments in Productivity Analysis, pages 225-302, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Engel, Charles & Rogers, John H, 1996. "How Wide Is the Border?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(5), pages 1112-1125, December.
    8. Caballero, Ricardo J. & Lyons, Richard K., 1992. "External effects in U.S. procyclical productivity," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 209-225, April.
    9. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2003. "Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to the Border Puzzle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 170-192, March.
    10. Kenneth L. Judd, 1998. "Numerical Methods in Economics," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262100711, December.
    11. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1990. "Comparative Advantage and Long-run Growth," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(4), pages 796-815, September.
    12. Branstetter, Lee G., 2001. "Are knowledge spillovers international or intranational in scope?: Microeconometric evidence from the U.S. and Japan," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 53-79, February.
    13. James H. Stock & Jonathan Wright, 2000. "GMM with Weak Identification," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1055-1096, September.
    14. Costello, Donna M, 1993. "A Cross-Country, Cross-Industry Comparison of Productivity Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(2), pages 207-222, April.
    15. McCallum, John, 1995. "National Borders Matter: Canada-U.S. Regional Trade Patterns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(3), pages 615-623, June.
    16. John B. Taylor, 1999. "Monetary Policy Rules," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number tayl99-1, January.
    17. Timothy G. Conley & Bill Dupor, 2003. "A Spatial Analysis of Sectoral Complementarity," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 111(2), pages 311-352, April.
    18. Engel, Charles & Rogers, John H., 2001. "Deviations from purchasing power parity: causes and welfare costs," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 29-57, October.
    19. Burnside, Craig, 1996. "Production function regressions, returns to scale, and externalities," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(2-3), pages 177-201, April.
    20. Horvath, Michael, 2000. "Sectoral shocks and aggregate fluctuations," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 69-106, February.
    21. Chen, Xiaoheng & Conley, Timothy G., 2001. "A new semiparametric spatial model for panel time series," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 59-83, November.
    22. Burnside, A. Craig & Eichenbaum, Martin S. & Rebelo, Sergio T., 1996. "Sectoral Solow residuals," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(3-5), pages 861-869, 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. Stella, Andrea, 2015. "Firm dynamics and the origins of aggregate fluctuations," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 71-88.
    2. Conley, Timothy G. & Molinari, Francesca, 2007. "Spatial correlation robust inference with errors in location or distance," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 140(1), pages 76-96, September.
    3. Jørn Rattsø & Torfinn Harding, 2009. "Looking Abroad, but Lagging Behind: How the World Technology Frontier Affects South Africa," Working Paper Series 10209, Department of Economics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology.

    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. Sharon G. Harrison, 2003. "Returns to Scale and Externalities in the Consumption and Investment Sectors," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 6(4), pages 963-976, October.
    2. Miles S. Kimball & John G. Fernald & Susanto Basu, 2006. "Are Technology Improvements Contractionary?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1418-1448, December.
    3. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2004. "Trade Costs," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(3), pages 691-751, September.
    4. Sergio Rebelo, 2005. "Real Business Cycle Models: Past, Present, and Future," NBER Working Papers 11401, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Marchetti, Domenico J. & Nucci, Francesco, 2005. "Price stickiness and the contractionary effect of technology shocks," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(5), pages 1137-1163, July.
    6. Virgiliu Midrigan, 2010. "Is Firm Pricing State or Time Dependent? Evidence from U.S. Manufacturing," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(3), pages 643-656, August.
    7. F. Owen Irvine & Scott Schuh, 2007. "The roles of comovement and inventory investment in the reduction of output volatility," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, issue nov.
    8. Ruwan Jayathilaka & Nandasiri Keembiyahetti, 2009. "Adverse Selection Effect for South Asian Countries in FTA Formation," South Asia Economic Journal, Institute of Policy Studies of Sri Lanka, vol. 10(1), pages 1-30, January.
    9. Neusser, Klaus, 2008. "Interdependencies of US manufacturing sectoral TFPs: A spatial VAR approach," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 991-1004, September.
    10. Xavier Gabaix, 2011. "The Granular Origins of Aggregate Fluctuations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 79(3), pages 733-772, May.
    11. Alexius, Annika & Carlsson, Mikael, 2001. "Measures of Technology and the Business Cycle: Evidence from Sweden and the U.S," Working Paper Series 174, Trade Union Institute for Economic Research.
    12. Brown, W. Mark, 2003. "Vaincre les distances, vaincre les frontières : comparaison des échanges régionaux en Amérique du Nord," Série de documents de recherche sur l'analyse économique (AE) 2003008f, Statistics Canada, Direction des études analytiques.
    13. Daniel L. Millimet & Thomas Osang, 2007. "Do state borders matter for U.S. intranational trade? The role of history and internal migration," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(1), pages 93-126, February.
    14. Mongelli, Francesco Paolo & De Grauwe, Paul, 2005. "Endogeneities of optimum currency areas: what brings countries sharing a single currency closer together?," Working Paper Series 468, European Central Bank.
    15. Carlsson, M., 2000. "Measures of Technology and the Short-Run Responses to Technology Shocks - Is the RBC-Model Consistent with Swedish Manufacturing Data?," Papers 2000-20, Uppsala - Working Paper Series.
    16. Michele Fratianni, 2004. "Borders and the Constraints on Globalization," Working Papers 2004-05, Indiana University, Kelley School of Business, Department of Business Economics and Public Policy.
    17. Hakan, Yilmazkuday, 2009. "Is there a Role for International Trade Costs in Explaining the Central Bank Behavior?," MPRA Paper 15951, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Brown, W. Mark, 2003. "Overcoming Distance, Overcoming Borders: Comparing North American Regional Trade," Economic Analysis (EA) Research Paper Series 2003008e, Statistics Canada, Analytical Studies Branch.
    19. Sean Holly & Ivan Petrella, 2012. "Factor Demand Linkages, Technology Shocks, and the Business Cycle," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(4), pages 948-963, November.
    20. Ying Ge & Yingxia Pu & Mengdi Sun, 2021. "Alternative measure of border effects across regions: Ripley's K‐function method," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 100(1), pages 287-302, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    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:fip:fedgif:788. 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: Ryan Wolfslayer ; Keisha Fournillier (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/frbgvus.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.