Papers Containing Tag(s): 'Annual Survey of Manufactures'
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
Viewing papers 1 through 10 of 244
-
Working PaperEstablishment-Level Life Cycle and Analysts' Forecasts
February 2026
Working Paper Number:
CES-26-12
This paper examines how multi-unit firms' life-cycle stages affect analyst forecast accuracy. While prior studies focus on the firm-level life cycle, we utilize the Census data and focus on the establishment level. We find that analyst forecast accuracy is lower for multi-unit firms whose establishments are in different life-cycle stages than those in the same life-cycle stage. This finding suggests that the forecasting difficulty of more diversified firms can be attributed to the different life-cycle stages of each establishment. We also find that for firms whose units are in different stages, analyst forecast accuracy is lower if the establishments in earlier stages are larger (i.e., generate more revenue) than those in later stages. As a comparison, we estimate the life-cycle stages using firms' segment classifications in their 10-K filings. We find that analysts' forecast accuracy is lower when firms report fewer segments than the number of establishments, suggesting that aggregating more establishments for segment reporting could complicate analysts' forecasting. To our knowledge, this is the first study that focuses on the establishment-level life cycle. This study highlights that firm-level life cycles should not be taken without caution, as aggregating multiple units' life cycles may be misleading. In order to provide better forecasts to investors, analysts should have a deeper understanding of firms' subunits, especially when the establishments are in different life-cycle stages.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperFresh Start or Fresh Water: The impact of Environmental Lender Liability
January 2026
Working Paper Number:
CES-26-05
I study the impact of lenders' environmental responsibility. The empirical setting exploits the U.S. Lender Liability Act of 1996, which reduced lenders' exposure to the environmental clean-up costs attached to some of their debtors' collateral, and employs difference-indifferences specifications estimated using EPA and U.S. Census microdata. Firms whose lenders face lower environmental liability risks increase pollution, reduce investment in abatement technologies by 14.7%, while experiencing small production and employment distortions. Lenders facing higher liability risks offer loans with less favorable pricing, thus financially incentivizing firms to become more environmentally responsible, and potentially monitor borrowers via shorter debt maturity.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperMeasurement Matters: Financial Reporting and Productivity
December 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-72
We examine how differences in financial reporting practices shape firm productivity. Leveraging new audit questions in the U.S. Census Bureau's 2021 Management and Organizational Practices Survey (MOPS), and complementary tax return data from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and detailed financial records from Sageworks, we find that (i) variation in reporting quality explains 10-20 percent of intra-industry total factor productivity dispersion, and (ii) evidence of complementarity between the effects of financial audits and management practices driving firm productivity. We then examine the underlying mechanisms. First, audits function as a managerial technology, improving the precision of internal information and raising efficiency, with stronger effects in competitive, low-margin industries and among younger firms. Second, exploiting cross-state variation in tax incentives, we show that audits constrain underreporting and mitigate the downward bias in measured productivity. Together, these results highlight the underrated importance of financial reporting quality driving firm productivity.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperManufacturing Dispersion: How Data Cleaning Choices Affect Measured Misallocation and Productivity Growth in the Annual Survey of Manufactures
September 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-67
Measurement of dispersion of productivity levels and productivity growth rates across businesses is a key input for answering a variety of important economic questions, such as understanding the allocation of economic inputs across businesses and over time. While item nonresponse is a readily quantifiable issue, we show there is also misreporting by respondents in the Annual Survey of Manufactures (ASM). Aware of these measurement issues, the Census Bureau edits and imputes survey responses before tabulation and dissemination. However, edit and imputation methods that are suitable for publishing aggregate totals may not be suitable for estimating other measures from the microdata. We show that the methods used dramatically affect estimates of productivity dispersion, allocative efficiency, and aggregate productivity growth. Using a Bayesian approach for editing and imputation, we model the joint distributions of all variables needed to estimate these measures, and we quantify the degree of uncertainty in the estimates due to imputations for faulty or missing data.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperJob Tasks, Worker Skills, and Productivity
September 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-63
We present new empirical evidence suggesting that we can better understand productivity dispersion across businesses by accounting for differences in how tasks, skills, and occupations are organized. This aligns with growing attention to the task content of production. We link establishment-level data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics survey with productivity data from the Census Bureau's manufacturing surveys. Our analysis reveals strong relationships between establishment productivity and task, skill, and occupation inputs. These relationships are highly nonlinear and vary by industry. When we account for these patterns, we can explain a substantial share of productivity dispersion across establishments.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperInvestments under Risk: Evidence from Hurricane Strikes
June 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-43
We demonstrate that firms with plants in areas subject to a significant hurricane strike reduce their capital expenditures at the hurricane-affected plants and shift capital expenditures to plants in non-hurricane-affected areas. This effect is not present prior to 1997 and only appears from 1997 on. Our evidence is consistent with the possibility that a significant climate event such as the signing of the Kyoto Protocol raised the salience of the perceived risk from actual hurricane strikes and shifted firm behavior.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperThe Rising Returns to R&D: Ideas Are Not Getting Harder to Find
May 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-29
R&D investment has grown robustly, yet aggregate productivity growth has stagnated. Is this because 'ideas are getting harder to find'? This paper uses micro-data from the US Census Bureau to explore the relationship between R&D and productivity in the manufacturing sector from 1976 to 2018. We find that both the elasticity of output (TFP) with respect to R&D and the marginal returns to R&D have risen sharply. Exploring factors affecting returns, we conclude that R&D obsolescence rates must have risen. Using a novel estimation approach, we find consistent evidence of sharply rising technological rivalry. These findings suggest that R&D has become more effective at finding productivity-enhancing ideas but these ideas may also render rivals' technologies obsolete, making innovations more transient.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperThe Rise of Industrial AI in America: Microfoundations of the Productivity J-curve(s)
April 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-27
We examine the prevalence and productivity dynamics of artificial intelligence (AI) in American manufacturing. Working with the Census Bureau to collect detailed large-scale data for 2017 and 2021, we focus on AI-related technologies with industrial applications. We find causal evidence of J-curve-shaped returns, where short-term performance losses precede longer-term gains. Consistent with costly adjustment taking place within core production processes, industrial AI use increases work-in-progress inventory, investment in industrial robots, and labor shedding, while harming productivity and profitability in the short run. These losses are unevenly distributed, concentrating among older businesses while being mitigated by growth-oriented business strategies and within-firm spillovers. Dynamics, however, matter: earlier (pre-2017) adopters exhibit stronger growth over time, conditional on survival. Notably, among older establishments, abandonment of structured production-management practices accounts for roughly one-third of these losses, revealing a specific channel through which intangible factors shape AI's impact. Taken together, these results provide novel evidence on the microfoundations of technology J-curves, identifying mechanisms and illuminating how and why they differ across firm types. These findings extend our understanding of modern General Purpose Technologies, explaining why their economic impact'exemplified here by AI'may initially disappoint, particularly in contexts dominated by older, established firms.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperThe Intangible Divide: Why Do So Few Firms Invest in Innovation?
February 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-15
Investments in software, R&D, and advertising have surged, nearing half of U.S. private nonresidential investment. Yet just a few hundred firms dominate this growth. Most firms, including large ones, regularly invest little in capitalized software and R&D, widening this 'intangible divide' despite falling intangible prices. Using comprehensive US Census microdata, we document these patterns and explore factors associated with intangible investment. We find that firms invest significantly less in innovation-related intangibles when their rivals invest more. One firm's investment can obsolesce rivals' investments, reducing returns. This negative pecuniary externality worsens the intangible divide, potentially leading to significant misallocation.View Full Paper PDF
-
Working PaperThe Effect of Oil News Shocks on Job Creation and Destruction
January 2025
Working Paper Number:
CES-25-06
Using data from the Annual Survey of Manufactures (ASM) and the Census of Manufacturing (CMF), we construct quarterly measures of job creation and destruction by 3-digit NAICS industries spanning from 1980Q3-2016Q4. These long series allow us to address three questions regarding the effect of oil news shocks. What is the average effect of oil news shocks on sectoral labor reallocation? What characteristics explain the observed heterogeneity in the average responses across industries? Has the response of US manufacturing changed over time? We find evidence that oil news shocks exert only a moderate effect on total manufacturing net employment growth but lead to a significant increase in job reallocation. However, we find a high degree of heterogeneity in responses across industries. We then show that the cross-industry variation in the sensitivity of net employment growth and excess job reallocation to oil news shocks is related to differences in energy costs, the rate of energy to capital expenditures, and the share of mature firms in the industry. Finally, we illustrate how the dynamic response of sectoral job creation and destruction to oil news shocks has declined since the mid-2000s.View Full Paper PDF
