The East-West German Gap in Revenue Productivity: Just a Tale of Output Prices?
Matthias Mertens, Steffen Müller
Abstract
East German manufacturers’ revenue productivity (value-added per worker) is some 8 (25) percent below West German levels, even three decades after German unification. Using firm-product-level data containing information on product quantities and prices, we analyse the role of product specialisation and reject the prominent ‚extended work bench hypothesis‘, stating a specialisation of Eastern firms in the intermediate input production as explanation for these sustained productivity differences. We decompose the East’s revenue productivity disadvantage into Eastern firms selling at lower prices and producing more physical output for given amounts of inputs within ten-digit product industries. This suggests that Eastern firms specialise vertically in simpler product varieties generating less consumer value but being manufactured with less or cheaper inputs. Vertical specialisation, however, does not explain the productivity gap as Eastern firms are physically less productive for given product prices, implying a genuine physical productivity disadvantage of Eastern compared to Western firms.
Read article
02.10.2019 • 20/2019
Joint Economic Forecast Autumn 2019: Economy Cools Further – Industry in Recession
Berlin, October 2, 2019 – Germany’s leading economics research institutes have revised their economic forecast for Germany significantly downward. Whereas in the spring they still expected gross domestic product (GDP) to grow by 0.8% in 2019, they now expect GDP growth to be only 0.5%. Reasons for the poor performance are the falling worldwide demand for capital goods – in the exporting of which the Germany economy is specialised – as well as political uncertainty and structural changes in the automotive industry. By contrast, monetary policy is shoring up macroeconomic expansion. For the coming year, the economic researchers have also reduced their forecast of GDP growth to 1.1%, having predicted 1.8% in the spring.
Oliver Holtemöller
Read press release
The Spatial Clustering of the Photo-voltaic Industry in Berlin-Brandenburg
Steffen Ebert, Matthias Brachert, Iciar Dominguez Lacasa
Wirtschaft im Wandel,
No. 11,
2009
Abstract
Recent empirical studies show a process of selective clustering in the photo-voltaic industry in East Germany. Especially locations like Bitterfeld-Wolfen, Freiberg/Dresden, Erfurt/Arnstadt and Berlin-Brandenburg were able to attract concentrations of economic activity in this industry. Regarding competition between the different locations for production and employment, emerging agglomeration economies can be seen as one major source increasing inter-regional competitiveness.
The aim of this article is to provide insights into the process of spatial clustering of photo-voltaic industry in Berlin-Brandenburg. With the help of a multi-dimensional cluster-concept developed by Bathelt, we analyse the region’s strengths and weaknesses regarding its generation of agglomeration economies.
The analysis shows that there are indeed first signs of agglomeration economies developing in the region. Despite a low level of horizontal cooperation, companies do profit from co-localisation by continuous observation of the local competitors. Along the value adding production chain, vertical co-operation is increasing, leading to positive effects by specialised suppliers and gains in transportation cost.
But the focal point in further industry development is the augmentation of the regional stock of knowledge. Regarding the increasing pressure on the companies’ innovativeness as a result of changes in market conditions in the photo-voltaic sector, only innovative and efficiently producing companies will be able to survive the industries’ consolidation period. Therefore, it is necessary to further support the increasing interconnectedness between university research, non-university research and local companies in order to profit from the high technological potential of the companies in the region.
Read article
Firm-Specific Determinants of Productivity Gaps between East and West German Industrial Branches
Johannes Stephan, Karin Szalai
IWH Discussion Papers,
No. 183,
2003
Abstract
Industrial productivity levels of formerly socialist economies in Central East Europe (including East Germany) are considerably lower than in the more mature Western economies. This research aims at assessing the reasons for lower productivities at the firm level: what are the firm-specific determinants of productivity gaps. To assess this, we have conducted an extensive field study and focussed on a selection of two important manufacturing industries, namely machinery manufacturers and furniture manufacturers, and on the construction industry. Using the data generated in field work, we test a set of determinant-candidates which were derived from theory and prior research in that topic. Our analysis uses the simplest version of the matched-pair approach, in which first hypothesis about relevant productivity level-determinants are tested. In a second step, positively tested hypothesis are further assessed in terms of whether they also constitute firm-specific determinants of the apparent gaps between the firms in our Eastern and such in our Western panels. Our results suggest that the quality of human capital plays an important role in all three industrial branches assessed. Amongst manufacturing firms, networking activities and the use of modern technologies for communication are important reasons for the lower levels of labour productivity in the East. The intensity of long-term strategic planning on behalf of the management turned out to be relevant only for machinery manufacturers. Product and process innovations unexpectedly exhibit an ambiguous picture, as did the extent of specialisation on a small number of products in the firms’ portfolio and the intensity of competition.
Read article
EU Accession Countries’ Specialisation Patterns in Foreign Trade and Domestic Production - What can we infer for catch-up prospects?
Johannes Stephan
IWH Discussion Papers,
No. 184,
2003
Abstract
This paper supplements prior analysis on ‘patterns and prospects’ (Stephan, 2003) in which prospects for the speed of future productivity growth were assessed by looking at the specialisation patterns in domestic production. This analysis adds the foreign trade sphere to the results generated in the prior analysis. The refined results are broadly in line with the results from the original analysis, indicating the robustness of our methods applied in either analysis. The most prominent results pertain to Slovenia and the Slovak Republic. Those two countries appear to be best suited for swift productivity catch-up from the viewpoint of sectoral specialisation. Poland and Estonia exhibit the lowest potentials. Only for the case of Poland would results suggest bleak prospects.
Read article
Evolving Structural Patterns in the Enlarging European Division of Labour: Sectoral and Branch Specialisation and the Potentials for Closing the Productivity Gap
Johannes Stephan
IWH-Sonderhefte,
No. 5,
2003
Abstract
This report summarises the results generated in empirical analysis within a larger EU 5th FP RTD-project on the determinants of productivity gaps between the current EU-15 and accession states in Central East Europe. The focus of research in this part of the project is on sectoral specialisation patterns emerging as a result of intensifying integration between the current EU and a selection of six newly acceding economies, namely Estonia, Poland, the Czech and Slovak Republics, Hungary and Slovenia. The research-leading question is concerned with the role played by the respective specialisation patterns for (i) the explanation of observed productivity gaps and for (ii) the projection of future potentials of productivity growth in Central East Europe.
For the aggregated level, analysis determines the share of national productivity gaps accountable to acceding countries’ particular sectoral patterns, and their role for aggregate productivity growth: in Poland, the Slovak Republic and Hungary, sectoral shares of national productivity gaps are considerable and might evolve into a ‘barrier’ to productivity catch-up.Moreover, past productivity growth was dominated by a downward adjustment in employment rather than structural change. With the industrial sector of manufacturing having been identified as the main source of national productivity gaps and growth, the subsequent analysis focuses on the role of industrial specialisation patterns and develops an empirical model to project future productivity growth potentials. Each chapter closes with some policy conclusions.
Read article
Industrial Specialisation and Productivity Catch-Up in CEECs - Patterns and Prospects -
Johannes Stephan
IWH Discussion Papers,
No. 166,
2002
Abstract
Read article
Structural change, specialization patterns, and the productivity gap between Central and Eastern Europe and the European Union
Johannes Stephan
Wirtschaft im Wandel,
No. 13,
2000
Abstract
The transition countries of Central East Europe exhibit significantly lower productivity levels than that of the average of the 15 European Union countries. Since the outset of transition, however, this gap has clearly narrowed.
Next to technological and organisational factors it is sectoral structures which play an important role for the development and level of national productivities: in most transition economies, structural change clearly contributed positively to productivity growth. Poland is an exception here, no significant effect of structural change between sectors and industrial branches on the growth of the national productivity level could be found. The low intensity of structural adjustment in Poland in particular in the agricultural sector corresponds with a decisive role played by the sectoral pattern of specialisation within the European division of labour as determinant of the productivity gap. Hungary and to some degree also Slovenia, the country with the lowest productivity gap, exhibit similar results. Only in the cases of the Czech Republic and Slovakia remain negligible the explanatory powers of respective patterns of specialisation as productivity determinants.
Read article