Location of Repository

to the source. Robustness of Productivity Estimates

By  and Johannes Van Biesebroeck and Johannes Van Biesebroeck and Johannes Van Biesebroeck

Abstract

Researchers interested in estimating productivity can choose from an array of methodologies, each with its strengths and weaknesses. Many methodologies are not very robust to measurement error in inputs. This is particularly troublesome, because fundamentally the objective of productivity measurement is to identify output differences that cannot be explained by input differences. Two other sources of error are misspecifications in the deterministic portion of the production technology and erroneous assumptions on the evolution of unobserved productivity. Techniques to control for the endogeneity of productivity in the firm's input choice decision risk exacerbating these problems. I compare the robustness of five widely used techniques: (a) index numbers, (b) data envelopment analysis, and three parametric methods: (c) instrumental variables estimation, (d) stochastic frontiers, and (e) semiparametric estimation. The sensitivity of each method to a variety of measurement and specification errors is evaluated using Monte Carlo simulations

Year: 2004
OAI identifier: oai:CiteSeerX.psu:10.1.1.196.3265
Provided by: CiteSeerX
Download PDF:
Sorry, we are unable to provide the full text but you may find it at the following location(s):
  • http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/v... (external link)
  • http://dsl.nber.org/papers/w10... (external link)
  • Suggested articles


    To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.