Firm Level Investment in France and the United States: An Exploration of What We Have Learned in Twenty Years

We review the changes in modelling strategy and econometric methodology when estimating a firm-level investment equation on panel data during the past twenty years, in order to assess which of these changes result from new estimation methods and changes in the practice of panel data econometrics, and which are "real" and due to the evolution of the economy. Thus our paper consists of a series of comparisons: a simple accelerator-profit specification versus one with error correction, traditional between- and within-firm estimation versus GMM estimation, the investment behavior of French firms versus that of U.S. firms, and investment behavior today versus ten to twenty years ago. Although the econometric advances have perhaps not been as successful as we had hoped, we do find some real change in firm behavior and some improvement in equation specification and interpretation during the past twenty years.investment, panel data, GMM, international comparisons, firm- level

Using Innovation Surveys for Econometric Analysis

After presenting the history, the evolution and the content of innovation surveys, we discuss the characteristics of the data they contain and the challenge they pose to the analyst and the econometrician. We document the two uses that have been made of these data: the construction of scoreboards for monitoring innovation and the scholarly analysis of various issue related to innovation. In particular we review the questions examined and the results obtained regarding the determinants, the effects, the complementarities, and the dynamics of innovation. We conclude by suggesting ways to improve the data collection and their econometric analysis. Dans cet article de survol sur les utilisations des enquêtes innovation, nous commençons par présenter leur historique et les informations qu’elles apportent. Nous discutons en détail les caractéristiques des données fournies et les difficultés qu’elles peuvent poser pour les analyses. Nous considérons successivement les deux usages auxquelles ces données servent principalement : la construction d'indicateurs et de « scoreboard » de l'innovation et les études économétriques sur différents thèmes ayant trait à l'innovation. Nous passons ainsi en revue les questions posées et les résultats obtenus par les études sur les déterminants de l’innovation, sur ses effets, sur les complémentarités entre types d’innovation et sur sa dynamique. Nous concluons par une liste de suggestions pour améliorer la conception et l’organisation des enquêtes innovation et pour progresser dans leur analyse économétrique.innovation survey, econometrics, complementarity, productivity, R&D, collaboration. , enquêtes innovation, économetrie, complémentarité, productivité, R&D, collaboration

Organizational Change in French Manufacturing: What Do We Learn From Firm Representatives and From Their Employees?

In this paper, we use a French matched employer-employee survey, the COI survey, conducted in 1997, to describe the general features of organizational change in manufacturing firms with more than 50 employees. In a first section, we explore the methodological issues associated with the building up of a statistical measure of organizational change, we describe the COI survey and we present the set of firm level and employee level variables that we have selected to investigate organizational change. In a second section, we present the results of two correspondence analysis, one conducted on a sample of 1462 firms from the COI survey and the other one conducted on the sample of 2049 blue collar workers affiliated to those firms. On one hand, using the firm level section of the survey, we show that all types of new organizational practices are positively correlated with one another. On the other hand, at the blue collar level, three main dimensions discriminate between jobs: the intensity of involvement in information processing and decision, the intensity of constraints weighing on the content and rhythm of work and the orientation of information and production flows: either pushed by colleagues or pulled by the market. We also find that blue collars cannot develop a high level of involvement in information processing and decisions and have at the same time their work rhythm fixed by heavy technical constraints whereas high time pressure imposed on work rhythm by the market is positively correlated with such an involvement. Finally, if we correlate firm level and worker level variables, we find that an increase in the use of 'employee involvement' and 'quality' practices by the firm is positively correlated both with a higher level of blue collars' involvement in information processing and decision and with a higher level of technical constraints, production flows being pushed by colleagues rather than pulled by the market. The mapping of firm level responses stemming from our first correspondence analysis has been used to select 4 firms in different areas of the statistical universe and belonging to the with executives from these firms and plant visit are used to check the quality of our statistical data and to better understand our descriptive results.

Panel Data Estimates of the Production Function and Product and Labor Market Imperfections

Consistent with two models of imperfect competition in the labor market, the efficient bargaining model and the monopsony model, we provide two extensions of a microeconomic version of Hall's framework for estimating price-cost margins. We show that both product and labor market imperfections generate a wedge between factor elasticities in the production function and their corresponding shares in revenue that can be characterized by a "joint market imperfections parameter". Using an unbalanced panel of 10646 French firms in 38 manufacturing industries over the period 1978-2001, we can classify these industries into six different regimes depending on the type of competition in the product and the labor market. By far the most predominant regime is one of imperfect competition in the product market and efficient bargaining in the labor market (IC-EB), followed by a regime of imperfect competition in the product market and perfect competition or right-to-manage bargaining in the labor market (IC-PR), and by a regime of perfect competition in the product market and monopsony in the labor market (PC-MO). For each of these three predominant regimes, we assess within-regime firm differences in the estimated average price-cost mark-up and rent-sharing or labor supply elasticity parameters, following the Swamy methodology to determine the degree of true firm dispersion. As a way to assess the plausibility of our findings in the case of the dominant regime (IC-EB), we also relate our industry and firm-level estimates of price-cost mark-up and (relative) extent of rent sharing to industry characteristics and firm-specific variables respectively.rent sharing, monopsony, price-cost mark-ups, production function, panel data

R&D and Productivity Growth: Comparing Japanese and U.S. Manufacturing Firms

We compute rates of growth in labor productivity during the 1973-80 period for samples of individual manufacturing firms, in both Japan and the U.S., and relate them to differences in the rates of growth in their capital-labor ratios and in their intensities of R&D effort. Japanese firms spent about as much of their own money on R&D, relative to sales, as did similar U.S.firms. An econometric analysis of R&D performing firms leads to the acceptance of the hypothesis that the contribution of such expenditures to productivity growth was about the same in both countries. Hence, the rather large differences on the observed rates of productivity growth between the two countries can not be accounted for by differences in either the intensity or fecundity of such expenditures. We do find two important differences between the two countries which help to explain a significant fraction of the observed differences in productivity but require in turn, an explanation of their own: 1) Japanese firms reduced their employment levels significantly during this period while US firms were increasing theirs. This, by itself, accounts for the twice as fast growth in capital-labor ratio in Japanese manufacturing. 2) The estimated effect of the growth in the capital-labor ratio on firm productivity is approximately twice as large in Japan than in the US. The two factors together can account for about half of the observed differences in the average rates of productivity growth between the two countries.

Micro-evidence on Rent Sharing from Different Perspectives

This article provides evidence of rent sharing from orthogonal directions. Taking advantage of a rich matched employer-employee dataset for France, we compare consistently across-industry heterogeneity in rentsharing parameters relying on three different approaches: (i) the productivity approach, (ii) the accounting approach and (iii) the traditional labor economics approach. Focusing on economically meaningful parameter estimates shows that there exist differences in dispersion across the different approaches but more importantly that the rent-sharing estimates are within a comparable range.Rent sharing; wage equation; production function; matched employer-employee data

Panel data estimates of the production function and product and labor market imperfections

Embedding the efficient bargaining model into the Hall (1988) approach for estimating price-cost margins shows that both imperfections in the product and labor markets generate a wedge between factor elasticities in the production function and their corresponding shares in revenue. This article investigates these two sources of discrepancies both at the industry and the firm level using an unbalanced panel of 10646 French firms in 38 manufacturing industries over the period 1978-2001. By estimating standard production functions, we are able to derive estimates of average price-cost mark-up and rent sharing parameters. Our industry-level results indicate that industry differences in these parameters are quite sizeable. To determine the degree of true firm-level heterogeneity, we adopt the Swamy (1970) methodology. The Swamy robust estimates of true dispersion show sizeable within-industry firm heterogeneity. Firm size, capital intensity, distance to the industry technology frontier and investing in R&D seem to account for part of this heterogeneity. JEL Classification: C33, D21, J51, L13panel data, price-cost mark-ups, production function, Rent sharing

Knowledge Management, Innovation, and Productivity: A Firm Level Exploration Based on French Manufacturing CIS3 Data

In modern knowledge driven economies, firms are increasingly aware that individual and collective knowledge is a major factor of economic performance. The larger the firms and the stronger their connection with technology intensive industries, the more are they likely to set up knowledge management (KM) policies, such as promoting a culture of information and knowledge sharing (C), motivating employees and executives to remain with the firm (R), forging alliances and partnerships for knowledge acquisition (A), implementing written knowledge management rules (W). The French 1998-2000 Community Innovation Survey (CIS3) has surveyed the use of these four knowledge management policies for a representative sample of manufacturing firms. The micro econometric analysis of the survey tends to confirm that knowledge management indeed contributes significantly to firm innovative performance and to its productivity. The impacts of adoption of the four surveyed KM practices on firm innovative and productivity performance are not completely accounted by firm size, industry, research & development (R&D) efforts or other factors, but persist to a sizeable extent after controlling for all these factors.

Measurement and Explanation of the Intensity of Co Co-publication in Scientific Research: An Analysis at the Laboratory Level

In this paper we study networks of academic researchers on an aggregated laboratory scale. We propose a measurement of the intensity of cooperation between laboratories, and attempt to account for its intra- and inter-town variations in relation to a number of characteristics: geographic distance between laboratories, specialization of laboratories, size of their scientific community, productivity, quality of their publications and international openness. Cooperative relations are identified on the basis of data on co-publication. These data concern French physicists from the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), between 1992 and 1997.