IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fip/fedmsr/445.html

An alternative theory of the plant size distribution with an application to trade

Author

Abstract

There is wide variation in the sizes of manufacturing plants, even within the most narrowly defined industry classifications used by statistical agencies. Standard theories attribute all such size differences to productivity differences. This paper develops an alternative theory in which industries are made up of large plants producing standardized goods and small plants making custom or specialty goods. It uses confidential Census data to estimate the parameters of the model, including estimates of plant counts in the standardized and specialty segments by industry. The estimated model fits the data relatively well compared with estimates based on standard approaches. In particular, the predictions of the model for the impacts of a surge in imports from China are consistent with what happened to U.S. manufacturing industries that experienced such a surge over the period 1997--2007. Large-scale standardized plants were decimated, while small-scale specialty plants were relatively less impacted.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas J. Holmes & John J. Stevens, 2010. "An alternative theory of the plant size distribution with an application to trade," Staff Report 445, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
  • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedmsr:445
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.minneapolisfed.org/publications_papers/pub_display.cfm?id=4424
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://www.minneapolisfed.org/research/SR/SR445.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Julien MARTIN & Florian MAYNERIS, 2013. "High-End Variety Exporters Defying Distance: Micro Facts and Macroeconomic Implications," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2013027, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    2. Nataraj, Shanthi, 2011. "The impact of trade liberalization on productivity: Evidence from India's formal and informal manufacturing sectors," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 292-301.
    3. Nicholas Bloom & Mirko Draca & John Van Reenen, 2016. "Trade Induced Technical Change? The Impact of Chinese Imports on Innovation, IT and Productivity," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 83(1), pages 87-117.
    4. Behrens, Kristian & Mion, Giordano & Murata, Yasusada & Suedekum, Jens, 2017. "Spatial frictions," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 40-70.
    5. Julian di Giovanni & Andrei A. Levchenko, 2012. "Country Size, International Trade, and Aggregate Fluctuations in Granular Economies," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 120(6), pages 1083-1132.
    6. Holmes, Thomas J. & Stevens, John J., 2012. "Exports, borders, distance, and plant size," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 91-103.
    7. Martin, Julien & Mejean, Isabelle, 2014. "Low-wage country competition and the quality content of high-wage country exports," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 140-152.
    8. David H. Autor & David Dorn & Gordon H. Hanson & Jae Song, 2014. "Trade Adjustment: Worker-Level Evidence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 129(4), pages 1799-1860.
    9. Casaburi, Lorenzo & Minerva, G. Alfredo, 2011. "Production in advance versus production to order: The role of downstream spatial clustering and product differentiation," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 32-46, July.
    10. A. Kerem Co?ar & Nezih Guner & James Tybout, 2016. "Firm Dynamics, Job Turnover, and Wage Distributions in an Open Economy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(3), pages 625-663, March.
    11. Thomas J. Holmes & John J. Stevens, 2010. "An alternative theory of the plant size distribution with an application to trade," Staff Report 445, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
    12. Swati Dhingra & John Morrow, 2012. "The Impact of Integration on Productivity and Welfare Distortions Under Monopolistic Competition," FIW Working Paper series 088, FIW.
    13. Ezra Oberfield & Devesh Raval, 2021. "Micro Data and Macro Technology," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(2), pages 703-732, March.
    14. Valter Di Giacinto & Matteo Gomellini & Giacinto Micucci & Marcello Pagnini, 2014. "Mapping local productivity advantages in Italy: industrial districts, cities or both?," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 365-394.
    15. Álvarez, Roberto & Vergara, Sebastián, 2013. "Trade exposure, survival and growth of small and medium-size firms," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 185-201.
    16. Hortaçsu, Ali & Syverson, Chad, 2009. "Why Do Firms Own Production Chains?," Working Papers 227, The University of Chicago Booth School of Business, George J. Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State.
    17. David H. Autor & David Dorn & Gordon H. Hanson, 2013. "The China Syndrome: Local Labor Market Effects of Import Competition in the United States," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(6), pages 2121-2168, October.
    18. Dhingra, Swati & Morrow, John, 2012. "The impact of integration on productivity and welfare distortions under monopolistic competition," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121764, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Soderbery, Anson, 2014. "Market size, structure, and access: Trade with capacity constraints," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 276-298.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • F10 - International Economics - - Trade - - - General
    • L11 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Production, Pricing, and Market Structure; Size Distribution of Firms

    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:fedmsr:445. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kate Hansel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cfrbmus.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.