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

A Model of Stratified Production Process and Spatial Risk

  • Tatsuaki Kuroda

    ()

In 2011, Japanese firms suffered great losses due to the Great East Japan Earthquake as well as Thailand floods. One of the reasons for their repetitive damages is that they depend on spatially dispersed supply chain. Basically, outsourcing becomes more attractive for final goods producers due to prevailing scale economy in modern machinery industries. The fragmentation of trade also works as dispersion or disintegration force as well. In addition, some firms have dispersed their plants against the risk of big earthquakes assumed around Tokyo or Nagoya (i.e., more developed metropolitan areas). In this case, however, such behavior brought about the contiguous damages for firms ironically. In the present study, we first build up a theoretical model that is able to explain the disintegration of production process over space due to scale economy or other factors of fragmentation. It is based on a multi-level Hotelling type spatial competition model in order to capture the characteristics of supply chain over space and cascade of risks. We assume a three level structure of circles. Consumers are distributed evenly over the lowest circle. On the second circle, there are final goods producers, for whom intermediate goods producers provide differentiated inputs from the top circle. Each producer can choose for a differentiated part between the integrated production in the her own plant and the disintegrated pattern where final good producers buy inputs from some intermediate goods producers located at different places. In the latter, she should pay for transport costs to buy the input though. We show recent technical tendency of some factors such as reinforced scale economy at each stage of production may provide advantages of disintegration. Once the equilibrium distribution or location of intermediate goods producers and final goods producers is determined, we evaluate it by the location risk such as earthquake. It means, for example, that firms with dispersed supply chain may be likely to suffer relatively small but often damages if location risks are evenly distributed over the space. Moreover, we could examine the optimal location of firms including location risk for a given  gutility h function of firms.

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://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa12/e120821aFinal00606.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by European Regional Science Association in its series ERSA conference papers with number ersa12p604.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Oct 2012
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa12p604
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Welthandelsplatz 1, 1020 Vienna, Austria

Web page: http://www.ersa.org

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. World Bank & United Nations, 2010. "Natural Hazards, UnNatural Disasters : The Economics of Effective Prevention," World Bank Publications, The World Bank, number 2512.
  2. Henriet, Fanny & Hallegatte, Stéphane & Tabourier, Lionel, 2012. "Firm-network characteristics and economic robustness to natural disasters," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 150-167.
  3. Donald R. Davis & David E. Weinstein, 2001. "Bones, Bombs and Break Points: The Geography of Economic Activity," NBER Working Papers 8517, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  4. TODO Yasuyuki & NAKAJIMA Kentaro & Petr MATOUS, 2013. "How Do Supply Chain Networks Affect the Resilience of Firms to Natural Disasters? Evidence from the Great East Japan Earthquake," Discussion papers 13028, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
  5. Stéphane Hallegatte & Valentin Przyluski, 2010. "The Economics of Natural Disasters," CESifo Forum, Ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 11(2), pages 14-24, 07.
  6. Masoud Yaghini & Mohammadreza Sarmadi & Nariman Nikoo & Mohsen Momeni, 2014. "Capacity Consumption Analysis Using Heuristic Solution Method for Under Construction Railway Routes," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 317-333, December.
  7. Robert C. Feenstra, 1998. "Integration of Trade and Disintegration of Production in the Global Economy," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 31-50, Fall.
  8. Francisco Silva & Lucia Gao, 2013. "A Joint Replenishment Inventory-Location Model," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 107-122, March.
  9. Ethier, Wilfred J, 1982. "National and International Returns to Scale in the Modern Theory of International Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 389-405, June.
  10. Mehrdad Shahabi & Shirin Akbarinasaji & Avinash Unnikrishnan & Rachel James, 2013. "Integrated Inventory Control and Facility Location Decisions in a Multi-Echelon Supply Chain Network with Hubs," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 497-514, December.
  11. Anthony J. Venables, 1993. "Equilibrium Locations of Vertically Linked Industries," CEP Discussion Papers dp0137, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
  12. Johannes Illenberger & Kai Nagel & Gunnar Flötteröd, 2013. "The Role of Spatial Interaction in Social Networks," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 255-282, September.
  13. Oded Cats & Erik Jenelius, 2014. "Dynamic Vulnerability Analysis of Public Transport Networks: Mitigation Effects of Real-Time Information," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 435-463, December.
  14. Carliss Y. Baldwin & Kim B. Clark, 2000. "Design Rules, Volume 1: The Power of Modularity," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262024667, March.
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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa12p604. 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: (Gunther Maier)

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.