IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iae/iaewps/wp2006n08.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Entry, Exit, and Productivity of Indonesian Electronics Manufacturing Plants

Author

Listed:
  • Alfons Palangkaraya

    (Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne)

  • Jongsay Yong

    (Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne)

Abstract

We study the link between plant turnover and productivity using Indonesian plant-level data for the period of 1990-95. First, we compare productivity differentials among incumbents, entrants, and exiting plants by constructing the Farrell technical efficiency index using data envelopment analysis. We test the significance of these differentials using Simar and Wilson (1998) bootstrap algorithm and Li’s (1996) nonparametric test of closeness between unknown distributions. We find that the incumbent plants are on average the most productive group in every year of the estimation period. Also, the new plants are relatively less productive than the exiting plants in the early years. However, they are more productive than the exiting plants in the later years. Second, and more importantly, we estimate the productivity change during the study period using the Malmquist productivity change index and decompose the change to see if the differences in measured productivity change among the three groups of plants come from differences in the efficiency change or the technical change. Since the existing literature rarely distinguishes between these two different components, little is known whether exiting plants are less productive because of their inability to catch up to the current frontier or to adopt a better technology. Similarly, not much known whether entrants’ ability to survive come from their being equipped with a ’better’ technology or being able to catch up to the current frontier. Our findings indicate that although new plants enter with relatively lower productivity levels, they exhibit the highest productivity change during the early years. In addition, we find entrants’ high productivity growth in the early period is due to a movement toward the frontier, while in the later period is due to an upward shift of the technology frontier. Exiting plants, on the other hand, exhibit the lowest productivity change during the early years when entrants experience high productivity change.

Suggested Citation

  • Alfons Palangkaraya & Jongsay Yong, 2006. "Entry, Exit, and Productivity of Indonesian Electronics Manufacturing Plants," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2006n08, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
  • Handle: RePEc:iae:iaewps:wp2006n08
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://melbourneinstitute.unimelb.edu.au/downloads/working_paper_series/wp2006n08.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James R. Tybout, 2000. "Manufacturing Firms in Developing Countries: How Well Do They Do, and Why?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(1), pages 11-44, March.
    2. Richard Ericson & Ariel Pakes, 1995. "Markov-Perfect Industry Dynamics: A Framework for Empirical Work," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 62(1), pages 53-82.
    3. Mark Doms & Eric J. Bartelsman, 2000. "Understanding Productivity: Lessons from Longitudinal Microdata," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(3), pages 569-594, September.
    4. Jovanovic, Boyan, 1982. "Selection and the Evolution of Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(3), pages 649-670, May.
    5. Fare, Rolf & Shawna Grosskopf & Mary Norris & Zhongyang Zhang, 1994. "Productivity Growth, Technical Progress, and Efficiency Change in Industrialized Countries," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(1), pages 66-83, March.
    6. Simar, Leopold & Wilson, Paul W., 1999. "Estimating and bootstrapping Malmquist indices," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(3), pages 459-471, June.
    7. Léopold Simar & Paul W. Wilson, 1998. "Sensitivity Analysis of Efficiency Scores: How to Bootstrap in Nonparametric Frontier Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(1), pages 49-61, January.
    8. Bee Yan Aw & Sukkyun Chung & Mark J. Roberts, 1998. "Productivity and the Decision to Export: Micro Evidence from Taiwan and South Korea," NBER Working Papers 6558, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Good, D. & Nadiri, M.I. & Sickles, R., 1996. "Index Number and Factor Demand Approaches to the Estimarion of Productivity," Working Papers 96-34, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
    10. Oulton,Nicholas & O'Mahony,Mary, 1994. "Productivity and Growth," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521453455.
    11. Lambson, V.E., 1989. "Industry Evolution With Sunk Costs And Uncertian Market Conditions," Working papers 8904, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
    12. Subodh Kumar & R. Robert Russell, 2002. "Technological Change, Technological Catch-up, and Capital Deepening: Relative Contributions to Growth and Convergence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(3), pages 527-548, June.
    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. Flora Bellone & Patrick Musso & Michel Quéré & Lionel Nesta, 2006. "Productivity and Market Selection of French Manufacturing Firms in the Nineties," Revue de l'OFCE, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 97(5), pages 319-349.
    2. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/7185 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/7186 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Michiel Van Dijk & Adam Szirmai, 2005. "Catch Up at the Micro-Level: Evidence from an Industry Case Study Using Manufacturing Census Data," DEGIT Conference Papers c010_038, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade.
    5. Viktoria Kocsis & Victoria Shestalova & Henry van der Wiel & Nick Zubanov & Ruslan Lukach & Bert Minne, 2009. "Relation entry, exit and productivity: an overview of recent theoretical and empirical literature," CPB Document 180.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    6. Volker Nocke, 2006. "A Gap for Me: Entrepreneurs and Entry," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 4(5), pages 929-956, September.
    7. Eslava, Marcela & Haltiwanger, John & Kugler, Adriana & Kugler, Maurice, 2004. "The effects of structural reforms on productivity and profitability enhancing reallocation: evidence from Colombia," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 333-371, December.
    8. Laurens Cherchye & Wim Moesen, 2003. "Institutional Infrastructure and Economic Performance: Levels versus Catching Up and Frontier Shifts," Public Economics Working Paper Series ces0314, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centrum voor Economische Studiën, Working Group Public Economics.
    9. Eslava, Marcela & Haltiwanger, John C. & Kugler, Adriana & Kugler, Maurice, 2009. "Trade Reforms and Market Selection: Evidence from Manufacturing Plants in Colombia," IZA Discussion Papers 4256, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    10. Eslava, Marcela & Haltiwanger, John & Kugler, Adriana & Kugler, Maurice, 2004. "The effects of structural reforms on productivity and profitability enhancing reallocation: evidence from Colombia," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 333-371, December.
    11. Raphael Bergoeing Vela & Andrés Hernando & Andrea Repetto, 2010. "Market Reforms and Efficiency Gains in Chile," Estudios de Economia, University of Chile, Department of Economics, vol. 37(2 Year 20), pages 217-242, December.
    12. Aw, Bee Yan & Chen, Xiaomin & Roberts, Mark J., 2001. "Firm-level evidence on productivity differentials and turnover in Taiwanese manufacturing," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 51-86, October.
    13. Lucia Foster & John C. Haltiwanger & C. J. Krizan, 2001. "Aggregate Productivity Growth: Lessons from Microeconomic Evidence," NBER Chapters, in: New Developments in Productivity Analysis, pages 303-372, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Tortosa-Ausina, Emili & Grifell-Tatje, Emili & Armero, Carmen & Conesa, David, 2008. "Sensitivity analysis of efficiency and Malmquist productivity indices: An application to Spanish savings banks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 184(3), pages 1062-1084, February.
    15. Markus Poschke, 2010. "The Regulation of Entry and Aggregate Productivity," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 120(549), pages 1175-1200, December.
    16. Suzanne Kok & Nicole Bosch & Anja Deelen & Rob Euwals, 2011. "Migrant Women on the Labour Market," CPB Discussion Paper 180.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    17. Mark Doms & Eric J. Bartelsman, 2000. "Understanding Productivity: Lessons from Longitudinal Microdata," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(3), pages 569-594, September.
    18. Bee Yan Aw & Xiaomin Chen & Mark J. Roberts, 1997. "Firm-level Evidence on Productivity Differentials, Turnover, and Exports in Taiwanese Manufacturing," NBER Working Papers 6235, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Marcus Asplund & Volker Nocke, 2003. "Firm Turnover in Imperfectly Competitive Markets," PIER Working Paper Archive 03-010, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    20. Fariñas, Jose C. & Ruano, Sonia, 2005. "Firm productivity, heterogeneity, sunk costs and market selection," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(7-8), pages 505-534, September.
    21. Bee Yan Aw & Sukkyun Chung & Mark J. Roberts, 1998. "Productivity and the Decision to Export: Micro Evidence from Taiwan and South Korea," NBER Working Papers 6558, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    22. Valentin Zelenyuk, 2023. "Productivity analysis: roots, foundations, trends and perspectives," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 60(3), pages 229-247, December.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D24 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Production; Cost; Capital; Capital, Total Factor, and Multifactor Productivity; Capacity
    • L63 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - Microelectronics; Computers; Communications Equipment

    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:iae:iaewps:wp2006n08. 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: Sheri Carnegie (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mimelau.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.