Papers written by Author(s): 'Douglas W Dwyer'
The following papers contain search terms that you selected. From the papers listed below, you can navigate to the PDF, the profile page for that working paper, or see all the working papers written by an author. You can also explore tags, keywords, and authors that occur frequently within these papers.
See Working Papers by Tag(s), Keywords(s), Author(s), or Search Text
Click here to search again
Frequently Occurring Concepts within this Search
Authors
No authors occur more than twice in this search.
Viewing papers 1 through 7 of 7
-
Working PaperPlant-Level Productivity and the Market Value of a Firm
June 2001
Working Paper Number:
CES-01-03
Some plants are more productive than others ' at least in terms of how productivity is conventionally measured. Do these differences represent an intangible asset? Does the stock market place a higher value on firms with highly productive plants? This paper tests this hypothesis with a new data set. We merge plant-level fundamental variables with firm-level financial variables. We find that firms with highly productive plants have higher market valuations as measured by Tobin's q ' productivity does indeed have a price.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperProductivity Races II: The Issue of Capital Measurement
January 1997
Working Paper Number:
CES-97-03
This paper explores the role of capital measurement in determining the productivity of individual textile plants. In addition to gross book value of capital, we experiment with a perpetual inventory measure of capital and implicit (estimated) deflator associated with the age of the plant. Following the methodology of the earlier paper (Productivity Races I), we find that measures of productivity constructed from different measures of capital are highly correlated. Further, their association with alternative measures of economic performance is approximately the same. Nevertheless, the perpetual inventory measure of capital -- the most desirable measure from a theoretical perspective -- does consistently outperform the other two measures.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperProductivity Races I: Are Some Productivuty Measures Better Than Others?
January 1997
Working Paper Number:
CES-97-02
In this study we construct twelve different measures of productivity at the plant level and test which measures of productivity are most closely associated with direct measures of economic performance. We first examine how closely correlated these measures are with various measures of profits. We then evaluate the extent to which each productivity measure is associated with lower rates of plant closure and faster plant growth (growth in employment, output, and capital). All measures of productivity considered are credible in the sense that highly productive plants, regardless of measure, are clearly more profitable, less likely to close, and grow faster. Nevertheless, labor productivity and measures of total factor productivity that are based on regression estimates of production functions are better predictors of plant growth and survival than factor share-based measures of total factor productivity (TFP). Measures of productivity that are based on several years of data appear to outperform measures of productivity that are based solely on data from the most recent year.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperWhittling Away At Productivity Dispersion Futher Notes: Persistent Dispersion or Measurement Error?
November 1996
Working Paper Number:
CES-96-11
This note considers several hypotheses regarding measurement error as a source of observed cross-sectional dispersion in plant-level productivity in the US textile industry. The hypotheses that reporting error and/or price rigidity in either materials and/or output account for a substantial portion of the observed dispersion in productivity are consistent with the data. Similarly, the hypothesis that transitory product niches or fashion effects lead to differential markups and consequently dispersion in observed productivity is consistent with the data. The hypothesis that transfer pricing problems lead to persistent differences in plant-level productivity, in contrast, does not appear to be consistent with the data. Finally, the hypothesis that some plants have permanent product niches that lead to dispersion in observed productivity does not appear to be consistent with data. In order to avoid imposing a strong functional form on the data, this note follows a non-parametric methodology developed in the early paper.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperARE FIXED EFFECTS FIXED? Persistence in Plant Level Productivity
May 1996
Working Paper Number:
CES-96-03
Estimates of production functions suffer from an omitted variable problem; plant quality is an omitted variable that is likely to be correlated with variable inputs. One approach is to capture differences in plant qualities through plant specific intercepts, i.e., to estimate a fixed effects model. For this technique to work, it is necessary that differences in plant quality are more or less fixed; if the "fixed effects" erode over time, such a procedure becomes problematic, especially when working with long panels. In this paper, a standard fixed effects model, extended to allow for serial correlation in the error term, is applied to a 16-year panel of textile plants. This parametric approach strongly accepts the hypothesis of fixed effects. They account for about one-third of the variation in productivity. A simple non-parametric approach, however, concludes that differences in plant qualities erode over time, that is plant qualities f-mix. Monte Carlo results demonstrate that this discrepancy comes from the parametric approach imposing an overly restrictive functional form on the data; if there were fixed effects of the magnitude measured, one would reject the hypothesis of f-mixing. For textiles, at least, the functional form of a fixed effects model appears to generate misleading conclusions. A more flexible functional form is estimated. The "fixed" effects actually have a half life of approximately 10 to 20 years, and they account for about one-half the variation in productivity.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperTechnology Locks, Creative Destruction And Non-Convergence In Productivity Levels
April 1995
Working Paper Number:
CES-95-06
This paper presents a simple solution to a new model that seeks to explain the distribution of plants across productivity levels within an industry, and empirically confirms some key predictions using the U.S. textile industry. In the model, plants are locked into a given productivity level, until they exit or retool. Convex costs of adjustment captures the fact that more productive plants expand faster. Provided there is technical change, productivity levels do not converge; the model achieves persistent dispersion in productivity levels within the context of a distortion free competitive equilibrium. The equilibrium, however, is rather turbulent; plants continually come on line with the cutting edge technology, gradually expand and finally exit or retool when they cease to recover their variable costs. The more productive plants create jobs, while the less productive destroy them. The model establishes a close link between productivity growth and dispersion in productivity levels; more rapid productivity growth leads to more widespread dispersion. This prediction is empirically confirmed. Additionally, the model provides an explanation for S-shaped diffusion.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperWhittling Away At Productivity Dispersion
March 1995
Working Paper Number:
CES-95-05
In any time period, in any industry, plant productivity levels differ widely and this dispersion is persistent. This paper explores the sources of this dispersion and their relative magnitudes in the textile industry. Plants that are measured as being more productive but pay higher wages are not necessarily more profitable; wage dispersion can account for approximately 15 percent of productivity dispersion. A plant that is highly productive today may not be as productive tomorrow. I develop a new method for measuring ex-ante dispersion and the percentage of dispersion "explained" by mean reversion. Mean reversion accounts for as much as one half the observed productivity dispersion. A portion of the dispersion, however, appears to reflect real quality differences between plants; plants that are measured as being more productive expand faster and are less likely to exit.View Full Paper PDF
1
Total Results: 7
