Using a difference-in-difference methodology, we find that the state-level deregulation of local U.S. banking markets leads to significant increases in the reallocation of labor within local industries towards small firms with higher marginal products of labor. Using plant-level data, we propose and examine an approach that quantifies the industry productivity gains from labor reallocation and find that these gains are economically important. Our analysis suggests that labor reallocation is a significant channel through which local banking markets affect the aggregate productivity and performance of local industries.
-
REALLOCATION IN THE GREAT RECESSION: CLEANSING OR NOT?
August 2013
Working Paper Number:
CES-13-42
The high pace of output and input reallocation across producers is pervasive in the U.S. economy. Evidence shows this high pace of reallocation is closely linked to productivity. Resources are shifted away from low productivity producers towards high productivity producers. While these patterns hold on average, the extent to which the reallocation dynamics in recessions are 'cleansing' is an open question. That is, are recessions periods of increased reallocation that move resources away from lower productivity activities towards higher productivity uses? It could be recessions are times when the opportunity cost of time and resources are low implying recessions will be times of accelerated productivity enhancing reallocation. Prior research suggests the recession in the early 1980s is consistent with an accelerated pace of productivity enhancing reallocation. Alternative hypotheses highlight the potential distortions to reallocation dynamics in recessions. Such distortions might arise from many factors including, for example, distortions to credit markets. We find that in post-1980 recessions prior to the Great Recession, downturns are periods of accelerated reallocation that is even more productivity enhancing than in normal times. In the Great Recession, we find the intensity of reallocation fell rather than rose (due to the especially sharp decline in job creation) and the reallocation that did occur was less productivity enhancing than in prior recessions.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Do SBA Loans Create Jobs? Estimates from Universal Panel Data and Longitudinal Matching Methods
September 2012
Working Paper Number:
CES-12-27
This pape reports estimates of the effects of the Small Business Administration (SBA) 7(a) and 504 loan programs on employment. The database links a complete list of all SBA loans in these programs to universal data on all employers in the U.S. economy from 1976 to 2010. Our method is to estimate firm fixed effect regressions using matched control groups for the SBA loan recipients we have constructed by matching exactly on firm age, industry, year, and pre-loan size, plus kernel-based matching on propensity scores estimated as a function of four years of employment history and other variables. The results imply positive average effects on loan recipient employment of about 25 percent or 3 jobs at the mean. Including loan amount, we find little or no impact of loan receipt per se, but an increase of about 5.4 jobs for each million dollars of loans. When focusing on loan recipients and control firms located in high-growth counties (average growth of 22 percent), places where most small firms should have excellent growth potential, we find similar effects, implying that the estimates are not driven by differential demand conditions across firms. Results are also similar regardless of distance of control from recipient firms, suggesting only a very small role for displacement effects. In all these cases, the results pass a "pre-program" specification test, where controls and treated firms look similar in the pre-loan period. Other specifications, such as those using only matching or only regression imply somewhat higher effects, but they fail the pre-program test.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
How Big is Small? The Economic Effects of Access to Small Business Subsidies
June 2024
Working Paper Number:
CES-24-28
Industry size standards that determine eligibility for small business subsidies have vastly increased
over the past decade. We exploit quasi-random variation in the implementation of size standard
increases to study the effects on small firms, subsidy allocation, and industry outcomes using
Census Bureau microdata. Following size standard increases, revenues decline for an industry's
smallest firms, and they are less likely to survive. We link these effects to a reallocation of
government procurement contracts from smaller to larger firms. Consequently, industries become
more concentrated and growth declines. These findings highlight the broad economic effects of
changing eligibility for small business subsidies.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
TRADE LIBERALIZATION AND LABOR SHARES IN CHINA
May 2014
Working Paper Number:
CES-14-24
We estimate the extent to which firms responded to tariff reductions associated with China's WTO entry by altering labor's share of value. Firm-level regressions indicate that firms in industries subject to tariff cuts raised labor's share relative to economy-wide trends, both through input choices and rent sharing. Labor's share of value is an estimated 12 percent higher in 2007 than it would be if tariffs had remained at their 1998 levels. There is significant variation across firms: the impact is larger where market access is better and it is influenced by union presence and state ownership.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
The Human Factor in Acquisitions: Cross-Industry Labor Mobility and Corporate Diversification
September 2015
Working Paper Number:
CES-15-31
Internal labor markets facilitate cross-industry worker reallocation and collaboration, and the resulting benefits are largest when the markets include industries that utilize similar worker skills. We construct a matrix of industry pair-wise human capital transferability using information obtained from more than 11 million job changes. We show that diversifying acquisitions occur more frequently among industry pairs with higher human capital transferability. Such acquisitions result in larger labor productivity gains and are less often undone in subsequent divestitures. Moreover, acquirers retain more high skill workers and they exploit the real option to move workers from the target firm to jobs in other industries inside the merged firm. Overall, our results identify human capital as a source of value from corporate diversification and provide an explanation for seemingly unrelated acquisitions.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
How Does State-Level Carbon Pricing in the United States Affect Industrial Competitiveness?
June 2020
Working Paper Number:
CES-20-21
Pricing carbon emissions from an individual jurisdiction may harm the competitiveness of local firms, causing the leakage of emissions and economic activity to other regions. Past research concentrates on national carbon prices, but the impacts of subnational carbon prices could be more severe due to the openness of regional economies. We specify a flexible model to capture competition between a plant in a state with electric sector carbon pricing and plants in other states or countries without such pricing. Treating energy prices as a proxy for carbon prices, we estimate model parameters using confidential plant-level Census data, 1982'2011. We simulate the effects on manufacturing output and employment of carbon prices covering the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic regions. A carbon price of $10 per metric ton on electricity output reduces employment in the regulated region by 2.7 percent, and raises employment in nearby states by 0.8 percent, although these estimates do not account for revenue recycling in the RGGI region that could mitigate these employment changes. The effects on output are broadly similar. National employment falls just 0.1 percent, suggesting that domestic plants in other states as opposed to foreign facilities are the principal winners from state or regional carbon pricing.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Gross Job Flows and Firms
November 1999
Working Paper Number:
CES-99-16
This paper extends the work of Dunne, Roberts, and Samuelson (3) and Davis, Haltiwanger, and Schuh (2) on gross job flows among manufacturing plants. Gross job creation, destruction, and reallocation have been shown to be important in understanding the birth, growth, and death of plants, and the relation of plant life cycles to the business cycle. However, little is known about job flows between firms or how job flows among plants occur within firms (corporate restructuring). We use information on company organization from the Longitudinal Research database (LRD) to investigate the relationship between plant-level and firm-level job flows. We document: (1) the fraction of plant-level gross job flows occurring between firms; and (2) gross job flows by the extent of excess job reallocation occurring in firms.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
The Importance of Reallocations in Cyclical Productivity and Returns to Scale: Evidence from Plant-Level Data
March 2007
Working Paper Number:
CES-07-05
This paper provides new evidence that estimates based on aggregate data will understate the true procyclicality of total factor productivity. I examine plant-level data and show that some industries experience countercyclical reallocations of output shares among firms at different points in the business cycle, so that during recessions, less productive firms produce less of the total output, but during expansions they produce more. These reallocations cause overall productivity to rise during recessions, and do not reflect the actual path of productivity of a representative firm over the course of the business cycle. Such an effect (sometimes called the cleansing effect of recessions) may also bias aggregate estimates of returns to scale and help explain why decreasing returns to scale are found at the industry-level data.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Entrant Experience and Plant Exit
August 2004
Working Paper Number:
CES-04-12
Producers entering a market can differ widely in their prior production experience, ranging from none to extensive experience in related geographic or product markets. In this paper, we quantify the nature of prior plant and firm experience for entrants into a market and measure its effect on the plant's decision to exit the market. Using plant-level data for seven regional manufacturing industries in the U.S., we find that a producer's experience at the time it enters a market plays an important role in the subsequent exit decision, affecting both the overall probability of exit and the method of exit. After controlling for observable plant and market profit determinants, there remain systematic differences in failure patterns across three groups of plants distinguished by their prior experience: de novo entrants, experienced plants that enter by diversifying their product mix, and new plants owned by experienced firms. The results indicate that the exit decision cannot be treated as determined solely by current and future plant, firm, and market conditions, but that the plant's history plays an important independent role in conditioning the likelihood of survival.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Considering the Use of Stock and Flow Outcomes in Empirical Analyses: An Examination of Marriage Data
January 2017
Working Paper Number:
CES-17-64
This paper fills an important void assessing how the use of stock outcomes as compared to flow outcomes may yield disparate results in empirical analyses, despite often being used interchangeably. We compare analyses using a stock outcome, marital status, to those using a flow
outcome, entry into marriage, from the same dataset, the American Community Survey. This paper considers two different questions and econometric approaches using these alternative measures: the effect of the Affordable Care Act young adult provision on marriage using a difference-indifferences
approach and the relationship between aggregate unemployment rates and marriage rates using a simpler ordinary least squares regression approach. Results from both analyses show stock and flow data yield divergent results in terms of sign and significance. Additional analyses suggest prior-period temporary shocks and migration may contribute to this discrepancy. These results suggest using caution when conducting analyses using stock data as they may produce false negative results or spurious false positive results, which could in turn give rise to misleading policy implications.
View Full
Paper PDF