|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
114790
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Using matched firm-level trade and production data over the period 2000-2006, we study the product-destination portfolio and dynamics of Chinese industrial exporters and make a thorough comparison among four types of firms and between two kinds of trade modes. We find that ownership structure and trading modes do matter to the destination and product mix choices of Chinese industrial exporters. In particular, foreign firms' exports and processing trade tend to be more destination-specific and products are more specialized. Therefore, foreign firms are more likely to maintain a particular link within a specific global supply chain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
149769
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Applying the theories of heterogeneous firms and the propensity score matching difference-in-differences (PSM-DID) method to a rich dataset of Chinese manufacturing firms, this paper examines the self-selection of firm-level R&D input and estimates the net effect of R&D on productivity. The analysis shows that (1) for Chinese manufacturing firms as a whole, R&D input is influenced by firm productivity: more productive firms are more likely to invest in R&D; (2) controlling for the self-selection effect, the net output elasticities of R&D input in one year and two years after R&D input are 3.92% and 5.25%, respectively; (3) although state-owned enterprises (SOEs) are more likely than all other ownership groups to invest in R&D, the R&D input is not productive; (4) although enterprises owned by investors outside of Mainland China are the least likely to invest in R&D, the output elasticity of R&D is more significant and larger in this group than in SOEs and privately owned Chinese firms; and (5) surprisingly, the net effect of R&D is not significant in high-tech industries. Policy implications are derived from the findings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
183775
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
While the firm-level distributional consequences of market liberalization are well understood, previous studies have paid only limited attention to how variations in domestic institutions across countries affect the winners and losers from opening up to trade. We argue that the presence of coordinated wage-bargaining institutions, which impose a ceiling on wage increases, and state-subsidized vocational training, which creates a large supply of highly skilled workers, generate labor market frictions. Upward wage rigidity, in particular, helps smaller firms weather the rising competition and increasing labor costs triggered by trade liberalization. We test this hypothesis using a firm-level data set of European Union countries, which includes more than 800,000 manufacturing firms between 2003 and 2014. We find that, for productive firms, gains from trade are 20 percent larger in countries with liberal market economies than they are in coordinated market economies. Symmetrically, less productive firms in coordinated market economies experience significantly smaller revenue losses compared to liberal market economies. We show that both the presence of an institutionalized wage ceiling and the availability of subsidized vocational training are key mechanisms for reducing the reallocation of revenue from unproductive to productive firms in coordinated market economies compared to liberal market economies. In line with our theory, we find that wages and employment in liberalized industries increase differentially across both types of labor markets. Finally, we provide suggestive evidence that trade liberalization triggers a differential demand for redistribution at the individual level across different labor markets, which is in line with our firm-level analysis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
186597
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
What determines public support for trade liberalization? Scholars of international political economy have generally focused on the effects of openness on employment via individuals’ skill level, sector, or occupation. Recent developments in trade economics suggest that the characteristics of individual citizens’ employing firms may also shape their attitudes on trade policy. In this paper, using under-explored survey data combining trade opinion with measures of employer productivity (from the 2008 Japanese General Social Survey), we present evidence that employees of more productive, more globalized firms are much more supportive of trade openness than employees of less productive, domestically oriented firms, even when accounting for skill level and sectoral and occupational characteristics. Moreover, we find evidence that the effects of these characteristics described in the literature are conditioned by globalized firm employment. Last, we find that the effect of globalized firm employment is conditioned by employees’ relative position within their firms. Those who are more likely to benefit directly from firm success—such as permanent employees and managers—hold the most pro-trade preferences. These findings suggest that economic interests affect individual policy preferences in more nuanced ways than previously recognized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|