Papers Containing Keywords(s): 'production'
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
Sang V Nguyen - 17
John Haltiwanger - 16
Lucia Foster - 16
Andrew Bernard - 13
J. Bradford Jensen - 11
Viewing papers 241 through 246 of 246
-
Working PaperMultifactor Productivity And Sources of Growth In Chinese Industry: 1980-85
October 1989
Working Paper Number:
CES-89-08
This paper examines the economic performance of the Chinese industrial sector in the post-reform period 1980-1985. A multifactor productivity model is used to isolate the contributions of labor, capital, and technical efficiency to growth in industrial output. Using information from the National Industrial Census of China (1988) for large and medium-size enterprises, we find that growth in industrial labor productivity in the post-reform period is attributable to increases in capital intensity not technical efficiency. Moreover, collective and other nonstate enterprises show higher partial labor and multifactor productivity gains than do state enterprises. We also find that multifactor productivity gains are closely tied to increases in retained profits and the proportion of total employees that are technical workers. Surprisingly, labor bonuses have a near zero or negative effect on multifactor productivity growth although this result is not very robust.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperPrice Dispersion in U.S. Manufacturing
October 1989
Working Paper Number:
CES-89-07
This paper addresses the question of whether products in the U.S. Manufacturing sector sell at a single (common) price, or whether prices vary across producers. The question of price dispersion is important for two reasons. First, if prices vary across producers, the standard method of using industry price deflators leads to errors in measuring real output at the firm or establishment level. These errors in turn lead to biased estimates of the production function and productivity growth equation as shown in Abbott (1988). Second, if prices vary across producers, it suggests that producers do not take prices as given but use price as a competitive variable. This has several implications for how economists model competitive behavior.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperThe Effects Of Leveraged Buyouts On Productivity And Related Aspects Of Firm Behavior
July 1989
Working Paper Number:
CES-89-05
We investigate the economic effects of leveraged buyouts (LBOs) using large longitudinal establishment and firm-level Census Bureau data sets linked to a list of LBOs compiled from public data sources. About 5 percent, or 1100, of the manufacturing plants in the sample were involved in LBOs during 1981-1986. We find that plants involved in LBOs had significantly higher rates of total-factor productivity (TFP) growth than other plants in the same industry. The productivity impact of LBOs is much larger than our previous estimates of the productivity impact of ownership changes in general. Management buyouts appear to have a particularly strong positive effect on TFP. Labor and capital employed tend to decline (relative to the industry average) after the buyout, but at a slower rate than they did before the buyout. The ratio of nonproduction to production labor cost declines sharply, and production worker wage rates increase, following LBOs. LBOs are production-labor-using, nonproduction-labor-saving, organizational innovations. Plants involved in management buyouts (but not in other LBOs) are less likely to subsequently close than other plants. The average R&D- intensity of firms involved in LBOs increased at least as much from 1978 to 1986 as did the average R&D-intensity of all firms responding to the NSF/Census survey of industrial R&D.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperMeasuring The Trade Balance In Advanced Technology Products
January 1989
Working Paper Number:
CES-89-01
Because of the dramatic decline in the United States Trade Balance since the early 1970's, many economists and policy makers have become increasingly concerned about the ability of U.S. manufacturers to compete with foreign producers. Initially concern was limited to a few basic industries such as shoes, clothing, and steel; but more recently foreign producers have been effectively competing with U.S. manufacturers in automobiles, electronics, and other consumer products. It now seems that foreign producers are even challenging the dominance of America in high technology industries. The most recent publication from the International Trade Administration shows that the U.S. Trade Balance in high technology industries fell from a $24 billion surplus in 1982, to a $2.6 billion deficit in 1986, before rebounding to a $591 million surplus in 1987. As part of the efforts of the U.S. Census Bureau to provide policy makers and other interested parties with the most complete and accurate information possible, we recently completed a review of the methodology and data used to construct trade statistics in the area of high technology trade. Our findings suggest that the statistics presented by the International Trade Administration, although technically correct, do not provide an accurate picture of international trade in high or advanced technology products because of the level of aggregation used in their construction. The ITA statistics are based on the Department of Commerce's DOC3 definition of high technology industries. The DOC3 definition requires that each product classified in a high tech industry be designated high tech. As a result, many products which would not individually be considered high tech are included in the statistics. After developing a disaggregate, product- based measure of international trade in Advanced Technology Products (ATP), we find that although the trade balance in these products did decline over the 1982-1987 period, the decline is much smaller (about $5 billion) than reported by ITA (approximately $24 billion). This paper discusses the methodology used to define the ATP measure, contrasts it to the DOC3 measure, and provides a comparison of the resulting statistics. After discussing alternative approaches to identifying advanced technology products, Section 2 describes the advanced technologies in the classification. (Appendix A, provides definitions and examples of the products which embody these technologies. In addition, Appendix B, available on request, provides a comprehensive list of Advanced Technology Products by technology grouping.) Having described the ATPs, Section 3 examines annual trade statistics for ATP products, in 1982, 1986, and 1987, and compares these statistics with equivalent ones based on the DOC3 measure. The differences between the two measures over the 1982- 87 period stem from changes in the balance of trade of items included in the DOC3 measure but excluded by the Census ATP measure; i.e. the differences are due to changes in the trade balance of "low tech" products which are produced in "high tech" industries. This finding corroborates a principal argument for construction of the ATP measure, that the weakness of the DOC3 measure of high technology trade is the level of aggregation used in its construction. It also suggests that at the level of individual products the high technology sectors of the economy continue to enjoy a strong comparative advantage and are surprisingly healthy. Nonetheless, some areas of weakness are identified, such as low tech products in high tech industries. (Appendix C, supplements this material by providing a detailed listing of traded products included and excluded from the Advanced Technology definition for each DOC3 high tech commodity grouping. These Tables enable the reader to directly assess the Census classification.)View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperModelling Technical Progress And Total Factor Productivity: A Plant Level Example
October 1988
Working Paper Number:
CES-88-04
Shifts in the production frontier occur because of changes in technology. A model of how a firm learns to use the new technology, or how it adapts from the first production frontier to the second, is suggested. Two different adaptation paths are embodied in a translog cost function and its attendant cost share equations. The paths are the traditional linear time trend and a learning curve. The model is estimated using establishment level data from a non-regulated industry that underwent a technological shift in the time period covered by the data. The learning curve resulted in more plausible estimates of technical progress and total factor productivity growth patterns. A significant finding is that, at the establishment level, all inputs appear to be substitutes.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperLong-Run Expectations And Capacity
April 1988
Working Paper Number:
CES-88-01
In this paper, we argue at a general level, that recent economic models of capacity and of its utilization are deficient because they do not adequately take into account firms' long-run expectations about conditions which are pertinent to their investment decisions, i.e., their decisions about altering productive capacity. We argue that the problem with these models is that they rely on the two conventional definitions of capacity which ignore these long-run expectations. Accordingly, we propose a third definition of capacity which incorporates these expectations and, thereby, corrects the problem. Furthermore, we argue that a correct, empirical analysis with the proposed definition -- indeed, any credible analysis of capacity or its utilization -- must take into account the demand for the output produced by the firms being studied. Finally, we apply the definition to clarify the meaning of surveys of capacity and, thus, show how it can be used to improve future surveys of capacity.View Full Paper PDF
