-
Productivity 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
-
Whittling 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
-
ARE 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
-
The Effect Of Technology Use On Productivity Growth
April 1996
Working Paper Number:
CES-96-02
This paper examines the relationship between the use of advanced technologies and productivity and productivity growth rates. We use data from the 1993 and 1988 Survey of Manufacturing Technology (SMT) to examine the use of advanced (computer based) technologies at two different points in time. We are also able to combine the survey data with the Longitudinal Research Database (LRD) to examine the relationships between plant performance, plant characteristics, and the use of advanced technologies. In addition, a subset of these plants were surveyed in both years, enabling us to directly associate changes in technology use with changes in plant productivity performance. The main findings of the study are as follows. First, diffusion is not the same across the surveyed technologies. Second, the adoption process is not smooth: plants added and dropped technologies over the six-year interval 1988-93. In fact, the average plant showed a gross change of roughly four technologies in achieving an average net increase of less than one new technology. In this regard, technology appears to be an experience good: plants experiment with particular technologies before deciding to add additional units or drop the technology entirely. We find that establishments that use advanced technologies exhibit higher productivity. This relationship is observed in both 1988 and 1993 even after accounting for other important factors associated with productivity: size, age, capital intensity, labor skill mix, and other controls for plant characteristics such as industry and region. In addition, the relationship between productivity and advanced technology use is observed both in the extent of technologies used and the intensity of their use. Finally, while there is some evidence that the use of advanced technologies is positively related to improved productivity performance, the data suggest that the dominant explanation for the observed cross-section relationship is that good performers are more likely to use advanced technologies than poorly performing operations.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
The Missing Link: Technology, Productivity, and Investment
October 1995
Working Paper Number:
CES-95-12
This paper examines the relationship between productivity, investment, and age for over 14,000 plants in the U.S. manufacturing sector in the 1972-1988 period. Productivity patterns vary significantly due to plant heterogeneity. Productivity first increases and then decreases with respect to plant age, and size and industry are systematically correlated with productivity and productivity growth. However, there is virtually no observable relationship between investment and productivity or productivity growth. Overall, the results indicate that plant heterogeneity and fixed effects are more important determinants of observable productivity patterns than sunk costs or capital reallocation. Key Words: productivity, investment, technical change
View Full
Paper PDF
-
Whittling 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
-
Pollution Abatement Costs, Regulation And Plant-Level Productivity
December 1994
Working Paper Number:
CES-94-14
We analyze the connection between productivity, pollution abatement expenditures, and other measures of environmental regulation for plants in three industries (paper, oil, and steel). We examine data from 1979 to 1990, considering both total factor productivity levels and growth rates. Plants with higher abatement cost levels have significantly lower productivity levels. The magnitude of the impact is somewhat larger than expected: $1 greater abatement costs appears to be associated with the equivalent of $1.74 in lower productivity for paper mills, $1.35 for oil refineries, and $3.28 for steel mills. However, these results apply only to variation across plants in productivity levels. Estimates looking at productivity variation within plants over time, or estimates using productivity growth rates show a smaller (and insignificant) relationship between abatement costs and productivity. Other measures of environmental regulation faced by the plants (compliance status, enforcement activity, and emissions) are not significantly related to productivity.
View Full
Paper PDF
-
On Productivity and Plant Ownership Change: New Evidence From the LRD
November 1993
Working Paper Number:
CES-93-15
This paper investigates the questions of what type of establishment experiences ownership change, and how the transferred properties perform after acquisition. Are they the profitable operations suggested by Ravenscraft and Scherer (1986), or the poorly operating ones found by Lichtenberg and Siegel (1992)? Is the primary motive of ownership change the rehabilitation of low productivity plants as suggested by Lichtenberg and Siegel? Our empirical work is based on an unbalanced panel of 28,294 plants taken from the U.S. Bureau of the Census' Longitudinal Research Database ( LRD ). The data set provides complete coverage of the food manufacturing industry (SIC 20) for the period 1977-1987. Our principle findings are that (1) ownership change is generally associated with the transfer of plants with above average productivity, however, large plants, empirically, those with more than 200 employees, are more likely to be purchased than closed when they are performing poorly; and (2) transferred plants experience improvement in productivity performance following the ownership change.
View Full
Paper PDF
