پیشرفت های فن آوری، تغییرات ساختاری و رشد بهره وری: یک دیدگاه
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|11316||2003||7 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Volume 14, Issue 1, March 2003, Pages 109–115
In a recent article, Fagerberg [Struct. Change Econ. Dyn. 11 (2000) 393] finds changes in the employment share of the electrical machinery industry to positively impact the manufacturing sector productivity growth. Fagerberg's approach has some methodological drawbacks, however. This note seeks to complement Fagerberg's analysis by estimating the impact of the employment share of technologically progressive industries using a more adequate methodology. Fagerberg's claim that the share of the ‘electronics’ industry positively affects manufacturing is confirmed. However, the size of the impact, and as a consequence the extent of spill-overs, is found to be much smaller than estimated by Fagerberg.
In a recent article, Fagerberg (2000) focuses on the relationship between the economic structure of a country and its productivity growth. He argues that the ‘electronics revolution’ will have impacted labour productivity in the manufacturing sector through important spill-over effects. This argument is given empirical backing by estimation results of an increase in the share of the electrical machinery industry (ISIC 383) in total manufacturing to have a positive and significant effect on the growth of total manufacturing productivity in the same period. Fagerberg uses a sample of 37 countries for the 1973–1990 period and finds that a 1% increase in the share of employment working in the electrical machinery industry has a predicted 0.5% higher growth of total manufacturing productivity. He shows that the size of this impact is very stable across different specifications. These results would suggest very strong spill-over effects of the ‘electronics revolution’. In the present note I will show that the specification and sample used by Fagerberg are likely to give biased results. I propose a more accurate procedure and use the OECD STAN Database providing data on the high-technology industries at a lower level of aggregation to obtain more reliable estimates. My results confirm Fagerberg's finding that the share of the ‘electronics’ industry has a positive and significant impact on total manufacturing productivity. The estimated size of the impact is much more modest though. I find a 1% increase in the employment share of the electrical machinery industry to have a 0.2% higher subsequent growth of total manufacturing productivity. That is, the extent of spill-over effects is estimated to be much lower than in Fagerberg's results.