Hostname: page-component-8678677fb7-wnmm5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-10-13T07:39:07.034Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ON THE DETERMINANTS OF TOTAL FACTOR PRODUCTIVITY GROWTH: EVIDENCE FROM SPANISH MANUFACTURING FIRMS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 November 2011

Fabio Castiglionesi  and
Carmine Ornaghi
Fabio Castiglionesi*
Affiliation:
Tilburg University
Carmine Ornaghi
Affiliation:
University of Southampton
*
Address correspondence to: Fabio Castiglionesi, Department of Finance, Tilburg University, Postbus 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, the Netherlands; e-mail: fabio.castiglionesi@uvt.nl.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper explores the main determinants of productivity growth. The analysis is performed using Spanish firm-level data. We define a framework where the relative magnitudes of alternative, but not exclusive, sources of technical change are simultaneously estimated. Our main finding is that the average total factor productivity (TFP) growth is fully explained by embodied technical progress (i.e., either new capital goods or human capital). Our results contradict the existence of a positive contribution of economywide neutral technological progress in determining average TFP growth. They also leave little room for large, unpriced effects external to the firm, both at the aggregate and at the industry level. We find evidence of firm-specific learning by doing, short-lived and due to adoption of new processes.

Keywords

TFP GrowthTechnical ChangeHuman CapitalLearning by Doing

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Macroeconomic Dynamics , Volume 17 , Issue 3 , April 2013 , pp. 501 - 530
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Abramovitz, M. (1956) Resources and output trends in the United States since 1870. American Economic Review 46, 5–23.Google Scholar
Arellano, M. and Bond, S. (1991) Some test of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Review of Economic Studies 58, 277–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bahk, B. and Gort, M. (1993) Decomposing learning by doing in new plants. Journal of Political Economy 101, 561–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baily, M.N., Hulten, C., and Campbell, D. (1992) Productivity dynamics in manufacturing plants. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity (Microeconomics), 187–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basu, S. and Fernald, J. (1995) Aggregate Productivity and the Productivity of Aggregates. NBER working paper 5382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, G.S. (1964) Human Capital. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Bernard, A.B., Eaton, J., Jensen, J.B., and Kortum, S. (2003) Plants and productivity in international trade. American Economic Review 93 (4), 1268–1290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blundell, R. and Bond, S. (2000) GMM estimation with persistent panel data: An application to production functions. Econometric Reviews 19, 321–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnside, C., Eichenbaum, M., and Rebelo, S. (1995) Capital Utilization and Returns to Scale. NBER working paper 5125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cummins, J.G. and Violante, G. (2002) Investment-specific technical change in the US (1947–2000): Measurement and macroeconomic consequences. Review of Economics Dynamics 5 (2), 243–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denison, E.F. (1969) Some major issues in productivity analysis: An examination of estimates by Jorgenson and Griliches. Survey of Current Business 49, 1–28.Google Scholar
Doms, M., Dunne, T., and Roberts, M.J. (1995) The role of technology use in the survival and growth of manufacturing plants. International Journal of Industrial Organization 13, 523–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doms, M., Dunne, T., and Troske, K.R. (1997) Worker, wages and technologies. Quarterly Journal of Economics 112, 253–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
González, X., Jaumandreu, J., and Pazo, C. (2005) Barriers to innovation and subsidy effectiveness. RAND Journal of Economics 36 (4), 930–949.Google Scholar
Greenwood, J., Hercowitz, Z., and Krusell, P. (1997) Long-run implication of investment-specific technological change. American Economic Review 87, 342–362.Google Scholar
Griliches, Z. (1979) Issues in assessing the contribution of R&D to productivity growth. Bell Journal of Economics 10, 92–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griliches, Z. and Mairesse, J. (1995) Production Function: The Search for Identification. NBER working Paper 5067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, R.E. (1990) Invariance properties of Solow's productivity residual. In Diamond, P. (ed.) Growth, Productivity, Unemployment. Essays to Celebrate Bob Solow's Birthday, pp. 71–112. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hellerstain, J. and Neumark, D. (2004) Production Function and Wage Equation Estimation with Heterogeneous Labor. NBER working paper 10325.Google Scholar
Henderson, D.J. and Russell, R.R. (2005) Human capital and convergence: A production-frontier approach. International Economic Review 46, 1167–1205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulten, C.R. (1986) Productivity change, capacity utilization, and the sources of efficiency growth. Journal of Econometrics 33, 31–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaffe, A.B. (1986) Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D: Evidence from firms' patents, profits, and market value. American Economic Review 76, 984–1001.Google Scholar
Jorgenson, D.W. and Griliches, Z. (1967) The explanation of productivity change. Review of Economic Studies 34, 249–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jorgenson, D.W. and Griliches, Z. (1972) Issues in growth accounting: A reply to E. F. Denison and Final replay. Survey of Current Business 52, 65–94 and 111.Google Scholar
Klette, T.J. (1999) Market power, scale economies and productivity: Estimates from a panel of establishment data. Journal of Industrial Economics 48, 451–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moretti, E. (2004) Workers' education, spillovers and productivity: Evidence from plant-level production function. American Economic Review 94, 656–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ornaghi, C. (2006) Assessing the effects of measurement errors on the estimation of a production function. Journal of Applied Econometrics 21, 879–891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paquet, A. and Robidoux, B. (2001) Issues on the measurement of the Solow residual and the testing of its exogeneity: Evidence from Canada. Journal of Monetary Economics 47, 595–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siotis, G. (2003) Competitive pressure and economic integration: An illustration for Spain, 1983–1996. International Journal of Industrial Organization 21, 1435–1459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solow, R. (1956) A contribution to the theory of economic growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics 70, 65–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solow, R. (1957) Technical change and the aggregate production function. Review of Economics and Statistics 39, 312–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solow, R. (1960) Investment and technological progress. In Arrow, K.J., Karlin, S., and Suppes, P. (eds.), Mathematical Method in Social Sciences, pp. 89–104. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Suits, D. (1984) Dummy variables: Mechanism V. Interpretation. Review of Economics and Statistics 66, 177–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Windmeijer, F. (2005) A finite sample correction for the variance of linear efficient two-step GMM estimators. Journal of Econometrics 126, 25–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wooldridge, J.M. (2002) Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar