We use confidential Census microdata to compare outcomes for plants in counties that 'win' a new plant to plants in similar counties that did not to receive the new plant, providing empirical evidence on the economic theories used to justify local industrial policies. We find little evidence that the average highly incentivized large plant generates significant productivity spillovers. Our semiparametric estimates of the overall local agglomeration function indicate that residual TFP is linear for the range of 'agglomeration' densities most frequently observed, suggesting local economic shocks do not push local economies to a new higher equilibrium. Examining changes twenty years after the new plant entrant, we find some evidence of persistent, positive increases in winning county-manufacturing shares that are not driven by establishment births.
-
Marshall's Scale Economies
December 2001
Working Paper Number:
CES-01-17
In this paper, using panel data, I estimate plant level production functions that include variables that allow for two types of scale externalities which plants experie nce in their local industrial environments. First are externalities from other plants in the same industry locally, usually called localization economies or, in a dynamic context, Marshall, Arrow, Romer [MAR] economies. Second are externalities from the scale or diversity of local economic activity outside the own industry involving some type of cross- fertilization, usually called urbanization economies or, in a dynamic context, Jacobs economies. Estimating production functions for plants in high tech industries and in capital goods, or machinery industries, I find that local own industry scale externalities, as measured specifically by the count of other own industry plants locally, have strong productivity effects in high tech but not machinery industries. I find evidence that single plant firms both benefit more from and generate greater external benefits than corporate plants. On timing, I find evidence that high tech single plant firms benefit from the scale of past own industry activity, as well as current activity. I find no evidence of urbanization economies from the diversity of local economic activity outside the own industry and limited evidence of urbanization economies from the overall scale of local economic activity.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
The Spatial Extent of Agglomeration Economies: Evidence from Three U.S. Manufacturing Industries
January 2012
Working Paper Number:
CES-12-01
The spatial extent of localized agglomeration economies constitutes one of the central current questions in regional science. It is crucial for understanding firm location decisions and for assessing the influence of proximity in shaping spatial patterns of economic activity, yet clear-cut answers are difficult to come by. Theoretical work often fails to define or specify the spatial dimension of agglomeration phenomena. Existing empirical evidence is far from consistent. Most sources of data on economic performance do not supply micro-level information containing usable geographic locations. This paper provides evidence of the distances across which distinct sources of agglomeration economies generate benefits for plants belonging to three manufacturing industries in the United States. Confidential data from the Longitudinal Research Database of the United States Census Bureau are used to estimate cross-sectional production function systems at the establishment level for three contrasting industries in three different years. Along with relevant establishment, industry, and regional characteristics, the production functions include variables that indicate the local availability of potential labor and supply pools and knowledge spillovers. Information on individual plant locations at the county scale permits spatial differentiation of the agglomeration variables within geographic regions. Multiple distance decay profiles are investigated in order to explore how modifying the operationalization of proximity affects indicated patterns of agglomeration externalities and interfirm interactions. The results imply that industry characteristics are at least as important as the type of externality mechanism in determining the spatial pattern of agglomeration benefits. The research methods borrow from earlier work by the author that examines the relationships between regional industrial structure and manufacturing production.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Propagation and Amplification of Local Productivity Spillovers
August 2022
Working Paper Number:
CES-22-32
This paper shows that local productivity spillovers can propagate throughout the economy through the plant-level networks of multi-region firms. Using confidential Census plant-level data, we find that large manufacturing plant openings not only raise the productivity of local plants but also of distant plants hundreds of miles away, which belong to multi-region firms that are exposed to the local productivity spillover through one of their plants. To quantify the significance of plant-level networks for the propagation and amplification of local productivity shocks, we develop and estimate a quantitative spatial model in which plants of multi-region firms are linked through shared knowledge. Counterfactual exercises show that while knowledge sharing through plant-level networks amplifies the aggregate effects of local productivity shocks, it can widen economic disparities between workers and regions in the economy.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Regional Industrial Dominance, Agglomeration Economies, and Manufacturing Plant Productivity
December 2007
Working Paper Number:
CES-07-31
In a seminal article, Benjamin Chinitz (1961) focused attention on the effects that industry size, structure, and economic diversification have on firm performance and regional economies. He also raised a related but conceptually distinct question that has been overlooked since: how does the extent to which a regional industry is concentrated in a single or small number of firms impact the performance of other local firms within that industry? He suggested that such regional industrial dominance may impact input prices, limit capital accessibility, deter entrepreneurial activity, and reduce the regional availability of agglomeration economies such as specialized labor and supply pools In this paper, we use an establishment-level production function to quantify the links between industrial dominance, agglomeration economies, and firm performance. We consider two questions. First, do greater levels of regional industrial dominance lead to lower economic performance by small, dominated manufacturing plants? Second, are small plants in dominated regional industries more limited in capturing regional agglomeration benefits and therefore do they face rigidities in deploying production factors to maximum advantage? Our results suggest that regional industrial organization does influence productivity but that the effect tends to be a direct one, rather than an indirect effect via its influence on agglomeration economies.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION AND INDUSTRY EMPLOYMENT: A REASSESSMENT
July 2013
Working Paper Number:
CES-13-36
This paper examines the impact of environmental regulation on industry employment, using a structural model based on data from the Census Bureau's Pollution Abatement Costs and Expenditures Survey. This model was developed in an earlier paper (Morgenstern, Pizer, and Shih (2002) - MPS). We extend MPS by examining additional industries and additional years. We find widely varying estimates across industries, including many implausibly large positive employment effects. We explore several possible explanations for these results, without reaching a satisfactory conclusion. Our results call into question the frequent use of the average impacts estimated by MPS as a basis for calculating the quantitative impacts of new environmental regulations on employment.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Tracing the Sources of Local External Economies
August 2004
Working Paper Number:
CES-04-13
In a cross-sectional establishment-level analysis using confidential secondary data, I evaluate the influence of commonly postulated sources of localized external economies'supplier access, labor pools, and knowledge spillovers'on the productivity of two U.S. manufacturing sectors (farm and garden machinery and measuring and controlling devices). Measures incorporating different distance decay specifications provide evidence of the spatial extent of the various externality sources. Chinitz's (1961) hypothesis of the link between local industrial organization and agglomeration economies is also investigated. The results show evidence of labor pooling economies and university-linked knowledge spillovers in the case of the higher technology measuring and controlling devices sector, while access to input supplies and location near centers of applied innovation positively influence efficiency in the farm and garden machinery industry. Both sectors benefit from proximity to producer services, though primarily at a regional rather than highly localized scale.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Dutch Disease or Agglomeration? The Local Economic Effects of Natural Resource Booms in Modern America
November 2015
Working Paper Number:
CES-15-41
Do natural resources benefit producer economies, or is there a "Natural Resource Curse," perhaps as Dutch Disease crowds out manufacturing? We combine new data on oil and gas abundance with Census of Manufactures microdata to estimate how oil and gas booms have affected local economies in the United States. Migration does not fully offset labor demand growth, so local wages rise. Notwithstanding, manufacturing is actually pro-cyclical with resource booms, driven by growth in upstream and locally traded sectors. The results highlight the importance of highly local demand for many manufacturers and underscore how natural resource linkages can drive manufacturing growth.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Agglomeration, Enterprise Size, and Productivity
August 2004
Working Paper Number:
CES-04-15
Much research on agglomeration economies, and particularly recent work that builds on Marshall's concept of the industrial district, postulates that benefits derived from proximity between businesses are strongest for small enterprises (Humphrey 1995, Sweeney and Feser 1998). With internal economies a function of the shape of the average cost curve and level of production, and external economies in shifts of that curve, a small firm enjoying external economies characteristic of industrial districts (or complexes or simply urbanized areas) may face the same average costs as the larger firm producing a higher volume of output (Oughton and Whittam 1997; Carlsson 1996; Humphrey 1995). Thus we observe the seeming paradox of large firms that enjoy internal economies of scale co-existing with smaller enterprises that should, by all accounts, be operating below minimum efficient scale. With the Birch-inspired debate on the relative job- and innovation-generating capacity of small and large firms abating (Ettlinger 1997), research on the small firm sector has shifted to an examination of the business strategies and sources of competitiveness of small enterprises (e.g., Pratten 1991, Nooteboom 1993). Technological external scale economies are a key feature of this research (Oughton and Whittam 1997).
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Where Do Manufacturing Firms Locate Their Headquarters?
October 2005
Working Paper Number:
CES-05-17
Firms' headquarters [HQ] support their production activity, by gathering information and outsourcing business services, as well as, managing, evaluating, and coordinating internal firm activities. In search of locations for these functions, firms often separate the HQ function physically from their production facilities and construct stand-alone HQs. By locating its HQ in a large, service oriented metro area away from its production facilities, a firm may be better able to out-source service functions in that local metro market and also to gather information about market conditions for their products. However if the firm locates the HQ away from its production activity, that increases the coordination costs in managing plant activities. In this paper we empirically analyze the trade-off of these two considerations.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Intra-Firm Spillovers? The Stock and Flow Effects of Collocation
January 2015
Working Paper Number:
CES-15-01
We examine the impact of collocation on local within-firm performance, or intra-firm spillovers, by decomposing spillovers into one-time stock and recurring flow effects. Stock effects include one-time learning effects. Flow effects include ongoing resource sharing as well as cannibalization. Using data on the population of U.S. hotels and restaurants from 1977-2007, we exploit changes in the number of collocated establishments owned by the same firm to estimate the relative importance of stock and flow benefits. We find that collocation improves the productivity of new and existing establishments by 1-2%, even when correcting for endogenous sorting into collocation. The results, in conjunction with our field work, suggest that collocation generally facilitates the transfer of knowledge within the firm, but that flow effects of collocation are more sensitive to the broader economic environment.
View Full
Paper PDF