O Brother, Where Start Thou? Sibling Spillovers on College and Major Choice in Four Countries
Adam Altmejd, Andrés Barrios-Fernández, Marin Drlje, Joshua Goodman, Michael Hurwitz, Dejan Kovač, Christine Mulhern, Christopher Neilson, Jonathan Smith
Quarterly Journal of Economics,
No. 3,
2021
Abstract
Family and social networks are widely believed to influence important life decisions, but causal identification of those effects is notoriously challenging. Using data from Chile, Croatia, Sweden, and the United States, we study within-family spillovers in college and major choice across a variety of national contexts. Exploiting college-specific admissions thresholds that directly affect older but not younger siblings’ college options, we show that in all four countries a meaningful portion of younger siblings follow their older sibling to the same college or college-major combination. Older siblings are followed regardless of whether their target and counterfactual options have large, small, or even negative differences in quality. Spillover effects disappear, however, if the older sibling drops out of college, suggesting that older siblings’ college experiences matter. That siblings influence important human capital investment decisions across such varied contexts suggests that our findings are not an artifact of particular institutional detail but a more generalizable description of human behavior. Causal links between the postsecondary paths of close peers may partly explain persistent college enrollment inequalities between social groups, and this suggests that interventions to improve college access may have multiplier effects.
Read article
European Firm Concentration and Aggregate Productivity
Tommaso Bighelli, Filippo di Mauro, Marc Melitz, Matthias Mertens
Abstract
This article derives a European Herfindahl-Hirschman concentration index from 15 micro-aggregated country datasets. In the last decade, European concentration rose due to a reallocation of economic activity towards large and concentrated industries. Over the same period, productivity gains from reallocation accounted for 50% of European productivity growth and markups stayed constant. Using country-industry variation, we show that changes in concentration are positively associated with changes in productivity and allocative efficiency. This holds across most sectors and countries and supports the notion that rising concentration in Europe reflects a more efficient market environment rather than weak competition and rising market power.
Read article
European Firm Concentration and Aggregate Productivity
Tommaso Bighelli, Filippo di Mauro, Marc Melitz, Matthias Mertens
Abstract
This article derives a European Herfindahl-Hirschman concentration index from 15 micro-aggregated country datasets. In the last decade, European concentration rose due to a reallocation of economic activity towards large and concentrated industries. Over the same period, productivity gains from reallocation accounted for 50% of European productivity growth and markups stayed constant. Using country-industry variation, we show that changes in concentration are positively associated with changes in productivity and allocative efficiency. This holds across most sectors and countries and supports the notion that rising concentration in Europe reflects a more efficient market environment rather than weak competition and rising market power.
Read article
The East-West-German Productivity Gap: Lessons from Firm-level Data?
Steffen Müller
Wirtschaftsdienst,
Konferenzband "30 Jahre Deutsche Einheit", März
2021
Abstract
Laut Volkswirtschaftlicher Gesamtrechnung erreicht die ostdeutsche Wirtschaft auch 30 Jahre nach dem Fall des Eisernen Vorhangs nur 80 % der westdeutschen Arbeitsproduktivität. Dieser Unterschied in der gesamtwirtschaftlichen Arbeitsproduktivität geht Hand in Hand mit vielen der wirtschaftlichen und gesellschaftlichen Probleme, denen Ostdeutschland heute gegenübersteht. Um die Ursachen des aggregierten Produktivitätsgefälles zu verstehen, wird die neuere Literatur zum Ost-West-Gefälle diskutiert, die granulare Daten auf Firmen- und Produktebene verwendet. Die Evidenz zeigt die Relevanz von Produktivitätsunterschieden auf Firmenebene für die aggregierte Lücke deutlich und stellt gängige Hypothesen infrage, die aus aggregierten Daten abgeleitet werden.
Read article
Importwettbewerb und Firmenproduktivität
Viktor Slavtchev
Wirtschaft im Wandel,
No. 1,
2021
Abstract
Dieser Beitrag untersucht für Unternehmen aus dem Verarbeitenden Gewerbe in Deutschland empirisch, ob der Wettbewerbsdruck durch Importe zu einer Steigerung der Produktivität führt. Um die Reaktionen der einheimischen Unternehmen besser zu verstehen, werden auch Effekte auf Output, Beschäftigung und FuE-Aktivitäten der Unternehmen analysiert. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass die Anreize der Unternehmen, in eine Erhöhung ihrer Produktivität zu „investieren“, von der Art der importierten Güter abhängen sowie davon, wie schwierig es für die einheimischen Unternehmen ist, mit der Konkurrenz mitzuhalten. Auf Importe von vergleichsweise technologisch einfachen und arbeitsintensiven Produkten aus Niedriglohnländern reagieren einheimische Unternehmen nicht mit einer Erhöhung ihrer Produktivität; vielmehr reduzieren sie Output und Beschäftigung. Dagegen steigt die Produktivität einheimischer Unternehmen als Reaktion auf Wettbewerbsdruck durch Importe von kapital- und technologieintensiven Gütern aus Industrieländern – jedoch nicht aufgrund höherer FuE-Ausgaben; ein Rückgang von Output und Beschäftigung ist in diesem Fall nicht beobachtbar.
Read article
Changing Business Dynamism and Productivity: Shocks versus Responsiveness
Ryan A. Decker, John Haltiwanger, Ron S. Jarmin, Javier Miranda
American Economic Review,
No. 12,
2020
Abstract
The pace of job reallocation has declined in the United States in recent decades. We draw insight from canonical models of business dynamics in which reallocation can decline due to (i) lower dispersion of idiosyncratic shocks faced by businesses, or (ii) weaker marginal responsiveness of businesses to shocks. We show that shock dispersion has actually risen, while the responsiveness of business-level employment to productivity has weakened. Moreover, declining responsiveness can account for a significant fraction of the decline in the pace of job reallocation, and we find suggestive evidence this has been a drag on aggregate productivity.
Read article
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
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
Age and High-Growth Entrepreneurship
Pierre Azoulay, Benjamin Jones, J. Daniel Kim, Javier Miranda
American Economic Review: Insights,
No. 1,
2020
Abstract
Many observers, and many investors, believe that young people are especially likely to produce the most successful new firms. Integrating administrative data on firms, workers, and owners, we study start-ups systematically in the United States and find that successful entrepreneurs are middle-aged, not young. The mean age at founding for the 1-in-1,000 fastest growing new ventures is 45.0. The findings are similar when considering high-technology sectors, entrepreneurial hubs, and successful firm exits. Prior experience in the specific industry predicts much greater rates of entrepreneurial success. These findings strongly reject common hypotheses that emphasize youth as a key trait of successful entrepreneurs.
Read article
Intangible Capital and Productivity. Firm-level Evidence from German Manufacturing
Wolfhard Kaus, Viktor Slavtchev, Markus Zimmermann
IWH Discussion Papers,
No. 1,
2020
Abstract
We study the importance of intangible capital (R&D, software, patents) for the measurement of productivity using firm-level panel data from German manufacturing. We first document a number of facts on the evolution of intangible investment over time, and its distribution across firms. Aggregate intangible investment increased over time. However, the distribution of intangible investment, even more so than that of physical investment, is heavily right-skewed, with many firms investing nothing or little, and a few firms having very large intensities. Intangible investment is also lumpy. Firms that invest more intensively in intangibles (per capita or as sales share) also tend to be more productive. In a second step, we estimate production functions with and without intangible capital using recent control function approaches to account for the simultaneity of input choice and unobserved productivity shocks. We find a positive output elasticity for research and development (R&D) and, to a lesser extent, software and patent investment. Moreover, the production function estimates show substantial heterogeneity in the output elasticities across industries and firms. While intangible capital has small effects for firms with low intangible intensity, there are strong positive effects for high-intensity firms. Finally, including intangibles in a gross output production function reduces productivity dispersion (measured by the 90-10 decile range) on average by 3%, in some industries as much as nearly 9%.
Read article
