IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

The effectiveness of state technology incentives: evidence from the machine tool industry

Listed author(s):
  • Martin, Sheila Ann
Registered author(s):

    Industrial competitiveness has become an important economic issue in the United States. A number of studies have confirmed that productivity in U.S. manufacturing has declined since the 1950s. However, they have found that a great deal of heterogeneity exists between firms, even within the same industry, with respect to productivity. This paper examines performance of individual plants in the machine tool industry to highlight heterogeneity among plants, and to investigate the characteristics of plants that are correlated with high efficiency;Technical efficiency is used as an indicator of plant performance. In this study, an econometric approach to technical efficiency measurement is adopted, and the method of maximum likelihood is employed. The data are derived from the Longitudinal Research Database, a plant level database created by the Center for Economic Studies at the U.S. Bureau of the Census. This rich and detailed database consists of data from the Census of Manufactures and the Annual Survey of Manufactures;Evidence of inefficiency was found in both of the machine tool industries, metal cutting tools and metal forming tools. Efficiency varies systematically with size, average production worker wage, and access to manufacturing extension. Using a probit analysis, it was determined that efficient plants were more likely to survive than relatively inefficient plants;The most serious efficiency problem facing the machine tool industry is a failure to fully utilize its fixed capital stock. This problem should be addressed through the development of new markets, particularly international markets. Manufacturing extension can be an important vehicle through which these markets might be developed. The machine tool industry in the United States also suffers from a relatively slow pace of advanced technology adoption and product development. Policies to promote technological advance and adoption should include R&D tax credits and other forms of government-industry risk sharing.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=11381&context=rtd
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Iowa State University, Department of Economics in its series ISU General Staff Papers with number 1992010108000011381.

    as
    in new window

    Length:
    Date of creation: 01 Jan 1992
    Handle: RePEc:isu:genstf:1992010108000011381
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    Iowa State University, Dept. of Economics, 260 Heady Hall, Ames, IA 50011-1070

    Phone: +1 515.294.6741
    Fax: +1 515.294.0221
    Web page: http://www.econ.iastate.edu
    Email:


    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as
    in new window


    1. Doms, Mark E, 1996. "Estimating Capital Efficiency Schedules within Production Functions," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 34(1), pages 78-92, January.
    2. Gong, Byeong-Ho & Sickles, Robin C., 1992. "Finite sample evidence on the performance of stochastic frontiers and data envelopment analysis using panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1-2), pages 259-284.
    3. Leibenstein, Harvey, 1978. "On the Basic Proposition of X-Efficiency Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 68(2), pages 328-332, May.
    4. Greene, William H., 1980. "Maximum likelihood estimation of econometric frontier functions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 27-56, May.
    5. Hausman, Jerry A & Taylor, William E, 1981. "Panel Data and Unobservable Individual Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(6), pages 1377-1398, November.
    6. Alicia H. Munnell, 1990. "Why has productivity growth declined? Productivity and public investment," New England Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, issue Jan, pages 3-22.
    7. Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
    8. Varian, Hal R., 1990. "Goodness-of-fit in optimizing models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1-2), pages 125-140.
    9. Hausman, Jerry, 2015. "Specification tests in econometrics," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 38(2), pages 112-134.
    10. Calem, Paul S. & Carlino, Gerald A., 1991. "Urban agglomeration economies in the presence of technical change," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 82-95, January.
    11. Holmstrom, Bengt R. & Tirole, Jean, 1989. "The theory of the firm," Handbook of Industrial Organization,in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 2, pages 61-133 Elsevier.
    12. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    13. Julius Margolis, 1958. "The Analysis of the Firm: Rationalism, Conventionalism, and Behaviorism," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31, pages 187-187.
    14. Harvey Leibenstein, 1975. "Aspects of the X-Efficiency Theory of the Firm," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 6(2), pages 580-606, Autumn.
    15. Meeusen, Wim & van den Broeck, Julien, 1977. "Efficiency Estimation from Cobb-Douglas Production Functions with Composed Error," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 18(2), pages 435-444, June.
    16. Irwin Feller, 1988. "Evaluating State Advanced Technology Programs," Evaluation Review, , vol. 12(3), pages 232-252, June.
    17. 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.
    18. Kopp, Raymond J. & Mullahy, John, 1990. "Moment-based estimation and testing of stochastic frontier models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1-2), pages 165-183.
    19. Jennifer F. Reinganum, 1981. "Market Structure and the Diffusion of New Technology," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 12(2), pages 618-624, Autumn.
    20. Richard Cabe, 1990. "Equilibrium Diffusion of Technological Change through Multiple Processes," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 90-wp60, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    21. Battese, George E. & Coelli, Tim J., 1988. "Prediction of firm-level technical efficiencies with a generalized frontier production function and panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 387-399, July.
    22. Zvi Griliches, 1957. "Specification Bias in Estimates of Production Functions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 39(1), pages 8-20.
    23. Pitt, Mark M. & Lee, Lung-Fei, 1981. "The measurement and sources of technical inefficiency in the Indonesian weaving industry," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 43-64, August.
    24. George E. Battese & Greg S. Corra, 1977. "Estimation Of A Production Frontier Model: With Application To The Pastoral Zone Of Eastern Australia," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 21(3), pages 169-179, December.
    25. Caves, Douglas W & Christensen, Laurits R & Diewert, W Erwin, 1982. "The Economic Theory of Index Numbers and the Measurement of Input, Output, and Productivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(6), pages 1393-1414, November.
    26. Shapiro, Carl, 1989. "Theories of oligopoly behavior," Handbook of Industrial Organization,in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 6, pages 329-414 Elsevier.
    27. Kenneth J. Arrow, 1962. "The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(3), pages 155-173.
    28. Frank R. Lichtenberg & Donald Siegel, 1987. "Productivity and Changes in Ownership of Manufactoring Plants," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3), pages 643-684.
    29. Jensen, Richard, 1982. "Adoption and diffusion of an innovation of uncertain profitability," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 182-193, June.
    30. Guilkey, David K & Lovell, C A Knox & Sickles, Robin C, 1983. "A Comparison of the Performance of Three Flexible Functional Forms," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 24(3), pages 591-616, October.
    31. Bartel, Ann P & Lichtenberg, Frank R, 1987. "The Comparative Advantage of Educated Workers in Implementing New Technology," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 69(1), pages 1-11, February.
    32. Battese, George E. & Corra, Greg S., 1977. "Estimation Of A Production Frontier Model: With Application To The Pastoral Zone Of Eastern Australia," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 21(03), December.
    33. Krattenmaker, Thomas G & Salop, Steven C, 1986. "Competition and Cooperation in the Market for Exclusionary Rights," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(2), pages 109-113, May.
    34. Cornwell, Christopher & Schmidt, Peter & Sickles, Robin C., 1990. "Production frontiers with cross-sectional and time-series variation in efficiency levels," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1-2), pages 185-200.
    35. Aigner, Dennis & Lovell, C. A. Knox & Schmidt, Peter, 1977. "Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 21-37, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:isu:genstf:1992010108000011381. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Curtis Balmer)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.