Productivity and the Business Cycle in Japan: Evidence from Japanese Industry Data

Constructing thirty-seven industries database, we examines whether measured productivity in Japan is procyclical and investigates the sources of that procyclicality using the production function approach employed by Hall (1990) and Basu and Fernald (1995). At the aggregate level, the measured Solow residual shows procyclicality. Large numbers of industries show constant returns to scale. No significant evidence for the presence of thick-market externalities is found. Our results also hold when we consider labor hoarding, part-time employment, and the adjustment cost of investment. The results suggest policies to revitalize the Japanese economy should concentrate on promoting productivity growth.

The Shadow of Death: Pre-exit Performance of Firms in Japan

This paper examines the pre-exit productivity performance and asks how productivity affects future survival, controlling for firm size and unobserved firm heterogeneity. Based on firm-level data in Japan for 1995-002, we found that firms did not face "sudden death" but there was a "shadow of death." Future exiting firms had lower performance five years before their exit. Moreover, unobserved firm heterogeneity had a statistically significant effect on firm survival analysis. However, we also found that the effects of unobserved heterogeneity were not very large and thus did not reverse the conclusion.

Cross-Border Acquisitions and Target Firms' Performance: Evidence from Japanese Firm-Level Data

Using Japanese firm-level data for the period from 1994-2002, this paper examines whether a firm is chosen as an acquisition target based on its productivity level, profitability and other characteristics and whether the performance of Japanese firms that were acquired by foreign firms improves after the acquisition. In our previous study for the Japanese manufacturing sector, we found that M&As by foreigners brought a larger and quicker improvement in total factor productivity (TFP) and profit rates than M&As by domestic firms. However, it may argued that firms acquired by foreign firms showed better performance simply because foreign investors acquired more promising Japanese firms than Japanese investors did. In order to address this potential problem of selection bias problem, in this study we combine a difference-in-differences approach with propensity score matching. The basic idea of matching is that we look for firms that were not acquired by foreign firms but had similar characteristics to firms that were acquired by foreigners. Using these firms as control subjects and comparing the acquired firms and the control subjects, we examine whether firms acquired by foreigners show a greater improvement in performance than firms not acquired by foreigners. Both results from unmatched samples and matched samples show that foreign acquisitions improved target firms' productivity and profitability significantly more and quicker than acquisitions by domestic firms. Moreover, we find that there is no positive impact on target firms' profitability in the case of both within-group in-in acquisitions and in-in acquisitions by domestic outsiders. In fact, in the manufacturing sector, the return on assets even deteriorated one year and two years after within-group in-in acquisition, while the TFP growth rate was higher after within-group in-in acquisitions than after in-in acquisitions by outsiders. Our results imply that in the case of within-group in-in acquisitions, parent firms may be trying to quickly restructure acquired firms even at the cost of deteriorating profitability.FDI, TFP, Acquisition, Selection bias, Propensity score matching, Average treatment effect

Cross-Border Acquisitons and Target Firms' Performance: Evidence from Japanese Firm-Level Data

Using Japanese firm-level data for the period from 1994-2002, this paper examines whether a firm is chosen as an acquisition target based on its productivity level, profitability and other characteristics and whether the performance of Japanese firms that were acquired by foreign firms improves after the acquisition. In our previous study for the Japanese manufacturing sector, we found that M&As by foreigners brought a larger and quicker improvement in total factor productivity (TFP) and profit rates than M&As by domestic firms. However, it may argued that firms acquired by foreign firms showed better performance simply because foreign investors acquired more promising Japanese firms than Japanese investors did. In order to address this potential problem of selection bias problem, in this study we combine a difference-in-differences approach with propensity score matching. The basic idea of matching is that we look for firms that were not acquired by foreign firms but had similar characteristics to firms that were acquired by foreigners. Using these firms as control subjects and comparing the acquired firms and the control subjects, we examine whether firms acquired by foreigners show a greater improvement in performance than firms not acquired by foreigners. Both results from unmatched samples and matched samples show that foreign acquisitions improved target firms' productivity and profitability significantly more and quicker than acquisitions by domestic firms. Moreover, we find that there is no positive impact on target firms' profitability in the case of both within-group in-in acquisitions and in-in acquisitions by domestic outsiders. In fact, in the manufacturing sector, the return on assets even deteriorated one year and two years after within-group in-in acquisition, while the TFP growth rate was higher after within-group in-in acquisitions than after in-in acquisitions by outsiders. Our results imply that in the case of within-group in-in acquisitions, parent firms may be trying to quickly restructure acquired firms even at the cost of deteriorating profitability.FDI, TFP, Acquisition, Selection bias, Propensity score matching, Average treatment effect

Cross-Border Acquisitions and Target Firms' Performance: Evidence From Japanese Firm-Level Data

Using Japanese firm-level data for the period from 1994-2002, this paper examines whether a firm is chosen as an acquisition target based on its productivity level, profitability and other characteristics and whether the performance of Japanese firms that were acquired by foreign firms improves after the acquisition. In our previous study for the Japanese manufacturing sector, we found that M&As by foreigners brought a larger and quicker improvement in total factor productivity (TFP) and profit rates than M&As by domestic firms. However, it may argued that firms acquired by foreign firms showed better performance simply because foreign investors acquired more promising Japanese firms than Japanese investors did. In order to address this potential problem of selection bias problem, in this study we combine a difference-in-differences approach with propensity score matching. The basic idea of matching is that we look for firms that were not acquired by foreign firms but had similar characteristics to firms that were acquired by foreigners. Using these firms as control subjects and comparing the acquired firms and the control subjects, we examine whether firms acquired by foreigners show a greater improvement in performance than firms not acquired by foreigners. Both results from unmatched samples and matched samples show that foreign acquisitions improved target firms%u2019 productivity and profitability significantly more and quicker than acquisitions by domestic firms. Moreover, we find that there is no positive impact on target firms%u2019 profitability in the case of both within-group in-in acquisitions and in-in acquisitions by domestic outsiders. In fact, in the manufacturing sector, the return on assets even deteriorated one year and two years after within-group in-in acquisition, while the TFP growth rate was higher after within-group in-in acquisitions than after in-in acquisitions by outsiders. Our results imply that in the case of within-group in-in acquisitions, parent firms may be trying to quickly restructure acquired firms even at the cost of deteriorating profitability.

Competition Policy and Law in Regional Economic Integration (Japanese)

This paper analyzes competition policy and antimonopoly law provisions with respect to regional integration. The international aspects of competition policy and antimonopoly law can take a variety of forms. With regard to the forms of agreement between countries, we compare bilateral agreements (focusing on bilateral cooperation and mutual assistance agreements) and multilateral agreements (focusing on the WTO) with agreements that adopt the form of regional integration, and through this we highlight aspects such as the characteristics, content, and functions of competition policies and antimonopoly law provisions in regional integration agreements. By means of a survey of regional integration agreements, we ascertain that with regard to their substantive provisions and their procedural provisions, two types exist in parallel: a type with strong functions for promoting the enactment of legislation and promoting their sharing by the participating countries, and a weak type that lacks these functions. Through this we can see that the regional integration format can combine the characteristics both of the bilateral agreement format and the multilateral agreement format. In addition, the process of regional integration can be understood as being that as the degree of integration increases, there is a progressive adoption of common competition policy and antimonopoly law and of central executive institutions, the more so when the integration is between developed nations. However, even in cases of integration between developed countries in which the degree of integration is advanced, there are some that try to maintain a high degree of commonality of competition policy and antimonopoly law provisions among the participating countries, without going so far as to have central executive institutions or common antimonopoly law provisions, while even in cases of integration by developing countries there are some that endeavor to adopt a form in which they have common antimonopoly law and other provisions. This paper further examines the characteristics of competition policies and antimonopoly law provisions in regional collaboration pacts and other agreements that Japan has concluded. Based on the above analysis of the background, content, administration, and other aspects of integration, it is possible to make meaningful suggestions as to the wealth of possibilities for the desirable forms that competition policy and antimonopoly law provisions should take in cases of regional integration, and as to the desirable forms of such provisions in cases of regional integration in which Japan is involved.

Revisiting Productivity Differences and Firm Turnover: Evidence from product-based TFP measures in the Japanese manufacturing industries

Following Foster, Haltiwanger, and Syverson (2008), we construct physical output based TFP (TFPQ) measures using data from the Census of Manufactures. We find that productivity differences among business establishments using TFPQ are larger than those using the traditional revenue-based TFP measures (TFPR). The negative correlation between physical output and output prices implies that establishments are facing a downward demand curve and the traditional measures of TFP are affected by idiosyncratic demand shocks. Probit estimations regarding exit behavior show that the combined effects of physical productivity improvement and higher prices through the increase in demand result in a lower probability of exit. Breaking down aggregate productivity growth using TFPQ, we find that the contribution of the net entry effects the largest factor to productivity improvement, in contrast to previous Japanese studies. Our results provide a more positive foundation for "creative destruction" policies than previous studies suggest.

International Transmission of the 2008 Crisis: Evidence from the Japanese stock market

We investigate the international transmission of the credit crisis triggered by the Lehman default in September 2008 using Japan's stock market data. Using cumulative returns (CR) during the crisis, starting from the day of Lehman's default and lasting until the day prior to the news of the TARP capital injection, we find that CR is negatively correlated with the export-to-sales ratio, the loan-to-asset ratio, and the share owned by foreign investors. Once controlling for market risk, however, cumulative abnormal returns (CAR) during the same period shows a different picture. CAR is not negatively correlated with export shares or the share owned by foreign investors, which implies that neither trade channels nor portfolio-rebalancing by foreigners are unique characteristics of the crisis, but can be observed in normal downturns. We find that CAR is negatively correlated with the loan-to-asset ratio, suggesting that market participants were worried about the credit crunch. We also find that CAR is negatively correlated with the shares of exports to North America and Asia after controlling for total exports, suggesting that the composition of export destination matters. Finally, we find that the concentration of export destination is also relevant.