A Study of the Competitiveness of Regions based on a Cluster Analysis: The Example of East Germany
Franz Kronthaler
IWH Discussion Papers,
No. 179,
2003
Abstract
This paper examines whether some East German regions have already achieved the same economic capability as the regions in West Germany, so that they are on a competitive basis with the West German regions and are able to reach the same economic level in the long run. If this is not the case, it is important to know more about the reasons for the economic weakness of the East German regions twelve years after unification.
The study is based on a cluster analysis. Criteria for the cluster formation are several economic indicators, which provide information about the economic capability of regions. The choice of the indicators is based on a review of results of the theoretical and empirical literature on the new growth theory and new economic geography.
The results show that most of the East German regions have not yet reached the economic capability and competitiveness of their West German counterparts so that they - from the viewpoint of the new growth theory and the new economic geography - are not in the position to reach the same economic level. According to these theories economic disadvantages are most notably the consequences of less technical progress, a lack of entrepreneurship and fewer business concentration. Under these points it is especially noteworthy that young well educated people leave these East German regions so that human capital might will turn into a bottle-neck in the near future. Only a few regions in East Germany - those with important agglomerations - are comparable to West German regions that are characterised by average capability and competitiveness, but not to those with above average economic capability and competitiveness. Even those more advanced East German regions still suffer from a slower technical progress.
There are important policy implications based on these results: regional policy in East Germany was not able to assist raising all regions to a sufficient level of competitiveness. It may be more effective to concentrate the regional policy efforts on a selection of important agglomerations. This has also strong implications for the EU regional policy assuming that the accession countries will have similar problems in catching up to the economic level of the EU as have the East German regions.
Read article
FDI Subsidiaries and Industrial Integration of Central Europe: Conceptual and Empirical Results
Boris Majcen, Slavo Radosevic, Matija Rojec
IWH Discussion Papers,
No. 177,
2003
Abstract
Read article
EU Eastern Enlargement and Structural Change: Specialization Patterns in Accession Countries and Economic Dynamics in the Single Market
Albrecht Kauffmann, P. J. J. Welfens, A. Jungmittag, C. Schumann
Diskussionsbeiträge des Europäischen Instituts für Internationale Wirtschaftsbeziehungen (EIIW), Bergische Universität Wuppertal, Nr. 106,
No. 106,
2003
Abstract
This paper analyses key issues of structural change and specialization patterns in the economies of an enlarged European Union. In all transition countries we observe a shift from the agricultural and industrial sector towards the service sector in terms of employment and productivity; however, in some countries a reindustrialisation drives is observed in a late transition stage. While some countries namely the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia, Poland, Estonia and Slovenia, have improved their productivity especially in medium-technology-intensive industries and may advance on the technological ladder, others remain unchanged and seem to get locked in labour-intensive industrial sectors. In the context of EU-enlargement, we expect trade creation – going along with a rise of intra-industry trade – and higher FDI-activities. Countries will have to adjust along the logic of comparative advantage, however, technological upgrading and human capital formation are fields in which government can stimulate the direction of comparative advantage. According to the Gerschenkron-hypothesis the accession countries have an “advantage of backwardness. Since accession countries have a low R&D-GDP ratio in the early transition stage rising government expenditures on research and development plus higher education is crucial. We expect the EU-15 countries in general to benefit from enlargement but gains will be asymmetric across countries: economic geography matters. Austria, Germany, the Scandinavian countries, the Netherlands, Italy and France are likely to profit more than the other members of EU-15. Germany and Austria additionally play a particularly crucial role as origins of FDI. Future research should focus on the speed and the scope of structural adjustment.
Read article
Does East Germany need a new technology policy? – Implications from the functioning of the R&D market after the transformation
Ralf Müller
IWH Discussion Papers,
No. 145,
2001
Abstract
Technology policy is a major part of government's efforts in contributing to East Ger-many's economic recovery. However, even a decade after unification East Germany does not produce sufficient technology goods. Thus, the question is whether technology policy is either not suitable or inefficient in tackling East Germany's deficits. A special technology policy for East Germany is justified by the lack of regional networks for technology firms; without a compensating policy East Germany would continue to lag behind West Germany also with respect to incomes. Yet only a few of the policy in-struments applied so far are efficiently dealing with these deficits. Thus, a future technology policy for East Germany should – mainly by the supply of R&D-infrastructure – support implementation of these kinds of networks.
Read article
A glimpse on sectoral convergence of productivity levels
Gerald Müller
IWH Discussion Papers,
No. 133,
2001
Abstract
This paper examines the presence of sectoral convergence of labor productivity between 14 OECD countries. Using the OECD International Sectoral Data Base (ISDB), the paper looks at the developments within 12 distinct sectors during the period 1970-1995. The change of the coefficients of variance suggests that there is strong sectoral convergence within most service sectors while the evidence of convergence for Manufacturing as well as for Communication is rather weak. These findings are in line with most studies undertaken on this subject so far. It is concluded that economic theories at hand to explain growth and convergence (or divergence respectively) are of different importance for the sectors concerned. While models of the New Growth Theory seemed to be useful to explain growth mechanisms within Manufacturing and Communication, traditional models seemed to apply to most other sectors.
Read article
Methodical limits of calculating productivity in the new Länder
Gerald Müller
IWH Discussion Papers,
No. 129,
2000
Abstract
The „Arbeitskreis Volkswirtschaftliche Gesamtrechnung der Länder“ now publishes figures concerning the value added in Germany. Formerly the Statistische Bundesamt had this assignment. Some corporations have plant locations in the new Länder as well as in the old Länder. The employed method for splitting-up the value added produce by these corporations might lead to an underestimation of the overall value added produced in the new Länder. However, an estimation using the firm panel of the IAB shows that the East German productivity gap for manufacturing is overestimated by maximally two percentage points. Still in sectors that are dominated by multi plant corporations this effect is stronger. All in all the East German productivity gab is overestimated by maximally three percentage points.
Read article
Spillover effects and R&D co-operations - The influence of market structure
Anita Wölfl
IWH Discussion Papers,
No. 122,
2000
Abstract
This paper examines empirically the role of market structure for the influence of spill-over effects on R&D-cooperations. The results of a microeconometric analysis, based on firm data on innovation, let in general presume that with intensified competition also the influence of spillovers on R&D-cooperation increases. However, competition seems to induce firms to search for effective firm-specific appropriation facilities first. Spillovers that are sufficiently high such that the internalisation effect from R&D-cooperation more than outweighs the competitive effect from research, only arise whenever firms are not able to protect their research results through any appropriation facility. Additionally, there is some evidence that spillover effects may even hinder firms from cooperating in R&D when there is intensive competition on the research stage.
Read article