The Significance of Entry and Exit for Regional Productivity Growth

2017 ◽  
pp. 113-132
Author(s):  
UDO BRIXY
Keyword(s):  
Productivity Growth ◽  
Entry And Exit ◽  
Regional Productivity

scholarly journals Innovation, Reallocation, and Growth

2018 ◽  
Vol 108 (11) ◽  
pp. 3450-3491 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daron Acemoglu ◽  
Ufuk Akcigit ◽  
Harun Alp ◽  
Nicholas Bloom ◽  
William Kerr
Keyword(s):  
Productivity Growth ◽  
Endogenous Entry ◽  
Entry And Exit ◽  
Firm Level ◽  
High Type ◽  
Percent Improvement ◽  
Us Census ◽  
Innovative Capacity ◽  
Firm Entry And Exit ◽  
Central Economic

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)

Distributive trade and regional productivity growth

2017 ◽  
Vol 37 (13-14) ◽  
pp. 833-857 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Di Berardino ◽  
D. D’Ingiullo ◽  
A. Sarra
Keyword(s):  
Productivity Growth ◽  
Regional Productivity

scholarly journals RECONCILED ESTIMATES AND NOWCASTS OF REGIONAL OUTPUT IN THE UK

2020 ◽  
Vol 253 ◽  
pp. R44-R59
Author(s):  
Gary Koop ◽  
Stuart McIntyre ◽  
James Mitchell ◽  
Aubrey Poon
Keyword(s):  
Productivity Growth ◽  
Regional Economies ◽  
Historical Time ◽  
Output Data ◽  
Regional Productivity ◽  
Annual Basis ◽  
National Statistics ◽  
Economic Statistics ◽  
Macroeconomic Indicators ◽  
The Uk

There is renewed interest in levelling up the regions of the UK. The combination of social and political discontent, and the sluggishness of key UK macroeconomic indicators like productivity growth, has led to increased interest in understanding the regional economies of the UK. In turn, this has led to more investment in economic statistics. Specifically, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) recently started to produce quarterly regional GDP data for the nine English regions and Wales that date back to 2012Q1. This complements existing real GVA data for the regions available from the ONS on an annual basis back to 1998; with the devolved administrations of Scotland and Northern Ireland producing their own quarterly output measures. In this paper we reconcile these two data sources along with UK quarterly output data that date back to 1970. This enables us to produce both more timely real terms estimates of quarterly economic growth in the regions of the UK and a new reconciled historical time-series of quarterly regional real output data from 1970. We explore a number of features of interest of these new data. This includes producing a new quarterly regional productivity series and commenting on the evolution of regional productivity growth in the UK.

scholarly journals Formalization and productivity: firm-level evidence from Viet Nam

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jann Lay ◽  
Tevin Tafese
Keyword(s):  
Productivity Growth ◽  
Manufacturing Sector ◽  
Viet Nam ◽  
Aggregate Productivity ◽  
Entry And Exit ◽  
Formal Sector ◽  
Policy Changes ◽  
Firm Level ◽  
Productivity Dynamics ◽  
Firm Entry And Exit

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document