IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ipt/iptwpa/jrc108932.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Entry barriers and their macroeconomic impact in the EU: an assessment using QUEST III

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Entry barriers make markets less contestable and thereby reduce competition, resulting in lower TFP, GDP and employment growth. Following the Lisbon strategy, Member States increasingly adopted measures to reduce the costs of starting a business. This paper quantifies the macroeconomic impact of such policies and identifies the main structural characteristics still driving the differences across Member States. In general, countries with high entry barriers and a less developed R&D sector seem to benefit proportionally more from a reduction of the so-called red tape barriers. Growth of GDP, TFP and employment could be further enhanced by also improving access to finance. Countries with a more developed R&D sector experience stronger growth in the long run when the reduction of the red tape barriers is accompanied by an improved access to finance.

Suggested Citation

  • Cristiana Benedetti-Fasil & Miguel Sanchez-Martinez & Peder Christensen, 2017. "Entry barriers and their macroeconomic impact in the EU: an assessment using QUEST III," JRC Research Reports JRC108932, Joint Research Centre.
    • Handle: RePEc:ipt:iptwpa:jrc108932
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC108932
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gilbert, Richard J., 1989. "Mobility barriers and the value of incumbency," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 8, pages 475-535, Elsevier.
    2. Hölzl, Werner & Janger, Jürgen, 2014. "Distance to the frontier and the perception of innovation barriers across European countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 707-725.
    3. Eric Bartelsman & Stefano Scarpetta & Fabiano Schivardi, 2003. "Comparative Analysis of Firm Demographics and Survival: Micro-Level Evidence for the OECD Countries," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 348, OECD Publishing.
    4. Klapper, Leora & Laeven, Luc & Rajan, Raghuram, 2006. "Entry regulation as a barrier to entrepreneurship," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 591-629, December.
    5. Daria Ciriaci, 2014. "Business Dynamics and Red Tape Barriers," European Economy - Economic Papers 2008 - 2015 532, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    6. Gabriel Felbermayr & Julien Prat, 2011. "Product Market Regulation, Firm Selection, And Unemployment," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 278-317, April.
    7. Criscuolo, Chiara & Gal, Peter N. & Menon, Carlo, 2014. "The dynamics of employment growth: new evidence from 18 countries," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 60286, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Jeffrey Campbell, 1998. "Entry, Exit, Embodied Technology, and Business Cycles," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 1(2), pages 371-408, April.
    9. Acemoglu, Daron & Cao, Dan, 2015. "Innovation by entrants and incumbents," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 255-294.
    10. Simeon Djankov & Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer, 2002. "The Regulation of Entry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 117(1), pages 1-37.
    11. 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.
    12. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 1991. "Quality Ladders in the Theory of Growth," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 58(1), pages 43-61.
    13. Giuseppe Nicoletti & Stefano Scarpetta, 2003. "Regulation, productivity and growth: OECD evidence [‘A model of growth through creative destruction’]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 18(36), pages 9-72.
    14. Rasmus Lentz & Dale T. Mortensen, 2008. "An Empirical Model of Growth Through Product Innovation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(6), pages 1317-1373, November.
    15. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    16. Klepper, Steven, 1996. "Entry, Exit, Growth, and Innovation over the Product Life Cycle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 562-583, June.
    17. Alex Coad & Sven-Olov Daunfeldt & Werner Hölzl & Dan Johansson & Paul Nightingale, 2014. "High-growth firms: introduction to the special section," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 23(1), pages 91-112, February.
    18. Peretto, Pietro F., 1996. "Industrialization, Technological Change and Long-Run Growth," Working Papers 96-22, Duke University, Department of Economics.
    19. K. J. Arrow, 1971. "The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: F. H. Hahn (ed.), Readings in the Theory of Growth, chapter 11, pages 131-149, Palgrave Macmillan.
    20. Albert Bravo-Biosca & Chiara Criscuolo & Carlo Menon, 2016. "What drives the dynamics of business growth?," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 31(88), pages 703-742.
    21. Francesca D'Auria & Andrea Pagano & Marco Ratto & Janos Varga, 2009. "A comparison of structural reform scenarios across the EU member states - Simulation-based analysis using the QUEST model with endogenous growth," European Economy - Economic Papers 2008 - 2015 392, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    22. Giammario Impullitti & Omar Licandro, 2018. "Trade, Firm Selection and Innovation: The Competition Channel," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 128(608), pages 189-229, February.
    23. Segerstrom, Paul S, 1991. "Innovation, Imitation, and Economic Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(4), pages 807-827, August.
    24. Alain Gabler & Omar Licandro, 2009. "Firm Dynamics Support the Importance of the Embodied Question," Economics Working Papers ECO2009/35, European University Institute.
    25. Giuseppe Nicoletti & Stefano Scarpetta, 2005. "Product Market Reforms and Employment in OECD Countries," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 472, OECD Publishing.
    26. Jovanovic, Boyan, 1982. "Selection and the Evolution of Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(3), pages 649-670, May.
    27. André Sapir, 2004. "Structural reforms and economic growth in the EU: is Lisbon the right agenda?," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/8126, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    28. Erzo G. J. Luttmer, 2007. "Selection, Growth, and the Size Distribution of Firms," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 122(3), pages 1103-1144.
    29. John Haltiwanger & Ron S. Jarmin & Javier Miranda, 2013. "Who Creates Jobs? Small versus Large versus Young," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(2), pages 347-361, May.
    30. Alain Gabler & Omar Licandro, "undated". "Firm Dynamics and the Importance of the Embodied Question," Working Papers 397, Barcelona School of Economics.
    31. Djankov, Simeon, 2008. "The Regulation of Entry: A Survey," CEPR Discussion Papers 7080, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    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. Acemoglu, Daron & Cao, Dan, 2015. "Innovation by entrants and incumbents," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 255-294.
    2. Michele Cincera, 2004. "Impact of market entry and exit on EU productivity and growth performance," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/921, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    3. Ufuk Akcigit & William R. Kerr, 2018. "Growth through Heterogeneous Innovations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(4), pages 1374-1443.
    4. Steven Bond‐Smith, 2022. "Discretely innovating: The effect of limited market contestability on innovation and growth," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 69(3), pages 301-327, July.
    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. Aghion, Philippe & Akcigit, Ufuk & Howitt, Peter, 2014. "What Do We Learn From Schumpeterian Growth Theory?," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 515-563, Elsevier.
    7. Laurent Cavenaile & Pau Roldan-Blanco, 2021. "Advertising, Innovation, and Economic Growth," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 13(3), pages 251-303, July.
    8. Silviano Esteve-Pérez & Fabio Pieri & Diego Rodriguez, 2022. "One swallow does not make a summer: episodes and persistence in high growth," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 58(3), pages 1517-1544, March.
    9. Ufuk Akcigit & William Kerr, 2015. "Growth through Heterogeneous Innovation, Second Version," PIER Working Paper Archive 15-020, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania, revised 25 Mar 2015.
    10. Markus Poschke, 2010. "The Regulation of Entry and Aggregate Productivity," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 120(549), pages 1175-1200, December.
    11. 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.
    12. Kox, Henk L.M. & Van Leeuwen, George & Van der Wiel, Henry, 2011. "Being numerous does not yield efficiency - Productivity and entry-exit determinants in European business services," MPRA Paper 106166, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Sep 2011.
    13. Warusawitharana Missaka, 2018. "Profitability and the lifecycle of firms," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, vol. 18(2), pages 1-30, June.
    14. Heyman, Fredrik & Norbäck, Pehr-Johan & Persson, Lars & Andersson, Fredrik, 2019. "Has the Swedish business sector become more entrepreneurial than the US business sector?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1809-1822.
    15. repec:zbw:bofrdp:2013_028 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Ufuk Akcigit & William R. Kerr, 2018. "Growth through Heterogeneous Innovations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(4), pages 1374-1443.
    17. Valkonen, Laura, 2006. "Deregulation as a Means to Increase Competition and Productivity," Discussion Papers 1014, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    18. Marcin Bielecki, 2017. "Business cycles, innovation and growth: welfare analysis," Working Papers 2017-19, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    19. Cristina Fernández & Roberta García & Paloma Lopez-Garcia & Benedicta Marzinotto & Roberta Serafini & Juuso Vanhala & Ladislav Wintr, 2017. "Firm growth in Europe: An overview based on the COMPNET labour module," BCL working papers 107, Central Bank of Luxembourg.
    20. Bianchini, Stefano & Pellegrino, Gabriele, 2019. "Innovation persistence and employment dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1171-1186.
    21. Jaan Masso & Amaresh K Tiwari, 2021. "Productivity Implications Of R&D, Innovation And Capital Accumulation For Incumbents And Entrants: The Case Of Estonia," University of Tartu - Faculty of Economics and Business Administration Working Paper Series 130, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, University of Tartu (Estonia).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Entry barriers; innovation; economic growth; macroeconomic modelling;
    All these 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:ipt:iptwpa:jrc108932. 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: Publication Officer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipjrces.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.