No disponible en español
Elisa Gamberoni
- 18 November 2016
- WORKING PAPER SERIES - No. 1981Details
- Abstract
- We analyse the evolution of capital and labour (mis)allocation across firms in five euro-area countries (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy and Spain) and eight main sectors of the economy during the period 2002-2012. Three key stylized facts emerge. First, in all countries with the exception of Germany, capital allocation has worsened over time whereas the efficiency of labour reallocation has not changed significantly. Second, the observed increase in capital misallocation has been particularly severe in services as opposed to industry. Third, misallocation of both labour and capital dropped in all countries in 2009 and again for some country-sectors in 2011-2012. We next take stock of the possible drivers of input misallocation dynamics in a standard panel regression framework. Controlling for demand conditions and for the initial level of misallocation, heightened uncertainty, restrictive bank credit standards and tight product and labour market regulation are found to have boosted input misallocation, whereas the Great Recession per se exerted a cleansing effect.
- JEL Code
- D24 : Microeconomics→Production and Organizations→Production, Cost, Capital, Capital, Total Factor, and Multifactor Productivity, Capacity
D61 : Microeconomics→Welfare Economics→Allocative Efficiency, Cost?Benefit Analysis
O47 : Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth→Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity→Measurement of Economic Growth, Aggregate Productivity, Cross-Country Output Convergence - Network
- Competitiveness Research Network
- 21 October 2016
- WORKING PAPER SERIES - No. 1970Details
- Abstract
- This study focuses on the employment effect of a hiring subsidy available to firms with less than 50 employees, granted in the context of the 2012 Spanish labour market reform. Exploiting the arbitrary firm size threshold using regression discontinuity design, estimates show on average 2 percentage points higher employment growth for firms that became eligible for the scheme. However, tests and complementary regressions suggest that the higher employment growth for smaller firms in 2013 is driven by a 2010 reform, which imposes more stringent reporting requirements on larger firms. Accounting for this using difference-in-discontinuity regressions, we fail to find any significant effect of the subsidy on increasing employment of eligible firms. While our study suggests several pitfalls arising from size-contingent regulations, more data are needed to test for benecial long-term effects from the hiring subsidy in addressing duality of the Spanish labour market.
- JEL Code
- C21 : Mathematical and Quantitative Methods→Single Equation Models, Single Variables→Cross-Sectional Models, Spatial Models, Treatment Effect Models, Quantile Regressions
D22 : Microeconomics→Production and Organizations→Firm Behavior: Empirical Analysis
E24 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Consumption, Saving, Production, Investment, Labor Markets, and Informal Economy→Employment, Unemployment, Wages, Intergenerational Income Distribution, Aggregate Human Capital
H25 : Public Economics→Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue→Business Taxes and Subsidies
- 29 August 2016
- WORKING PAPER SERIES - No. 1950Details
- Abstract
- We investigate the role of corruption in the business environment in explaining the efficiency of within-sector production factor allocation across firms in nine Central and Eastern European countries in the period 2003-2012. Using a conditional convergence model, we find evidence of a positive relationship between corruption growth and both labour and capital misallocation dynamics, once country framework conditions are controlled for: the link between corruption and input misallocation dynamics is larger the smaller the country, the lower the degree of political stability and of civil liberties, and the weaker the quality of its regulations. As input misallocation is one of the determinants of productivity growth, we further show that the relationship between changes in corruption and TFP growth is indeed negative. Our results hold when we tackle a possible omitted variable bias by instrumenting corruption with two instrumental variables (the percentage of women in Parliament and freedom of the press).
- JEL Code
- D24 : Microeconomics→Production and Organizations→Production, Cost, Capital, Capital, Total Factor, and Multifactor Productivity, Capacity
D73 : Microeconomics→Analysis of Collective Decision-Making→Bureaucracy, Administrative Processes in Public Organizations, Corruption
O47 : Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth→Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity→Measurement of Economic Growth, Aggregate Productivity, Cross-Country Output Convergence - Network
- Competitiveness Research Network