scholarly journals Understanding Productivity: Lessons from Longitudinal Microdata

2000 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 569-594 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric J Bartelsman ◽  
Mark Doms

This paper reviews research that uses longitudinal microdata to document productivity movements and to examine factors behind productivity growth. The research explores the dispersion of productivity across firms and establishments, the persistence of productivity differentials, the consequences of entry and exit, and the contribution of resource reallocation across firms to aggregate productivity growth. The research also reveals important factors correlated with productivity growth, such as managerial ability, technology use, human capital, and regulation. The more advanced literature in the field has begun to address the more difficult questions of the causality between these factors and productivity growth.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jann Lay ◽  
Tevin Tafese

Using a firm-level panel dataset on private small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Viet Nam’s manufacturing sector, this paper examines productivity dynamics of formal and informal firms. We decompose productivity changes into changes within and between formal and informal firms. We assess the contributions of firm entry and exit as well as informal–formal transitions. Our results show that productivity is considerably lower and misallocation more prevalent in the informal than in the formal sector. Yet, formalizing firms in Viet Nam make an important contribution to aggregate productivity growth among manufacturing SMEs, growing faster than other firms and increasing efficiency. We identify two ‘regimes’ of formalization. Until early 2010, more productive (previously) informal firms formalize. Policy changes and accelerated formalization then alter the characteristics of formalizers, as less productive firms become formal. While this formalization wave depresses average formal total factor productivity growth, the overall productivity effect is positive.


2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 511-534
Author(s):  
Marta C. N. Simões ◽  
Adelaide Duarte ◽  
João Sousa Andrade

2018 ◽  
Vol 108 (11) ◽  
pp. 3450-3491 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daron Acemoglu ◽  
Ufuk Akcigit ◽  
Harun Alp ◽  
Nicholas Bloom ◽  
William Kerr

We build a model of firm-level innovation, productivity growth, and reallocation featuring endogenous entry and exit. A new and central economic force is the selection between high- and low-type firms, which differ in terms of their innovative capacity. We estimate the parameters of the model using US Census microdata on firm-level output, R&D, and patenting. The model provides a good fit to the dynamics of firm entry and exit, output, and R&D. Taxing the continued operation of incumbents can lead to sizable gains (of the order of 1.4 percent improvement in welfare) by encouraging exit of less productive firms and freeing up skilled labor to be used for R&D by high-type incumbents. Subsidies to the R&D of incumbents do not achieve this objective because they encourage the survival and expansion of low-type firms. (JEL D21, D24, H25, L52, O31, O34)


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Fang Zheng ◽  
Youngho Chang

This study emphasizes a role of human capital in the measurement of productivity growth and highlights the importance of sample selections in analyzing productivity change of ASEAN countries, especially from 2000 to 2010. The productivity growth in ASEAN countries appears to deteriorate, mainly due to efficiency losses in the first half of the decade and the lack of technological improvement in the second half of the decade.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document