Real GDP in Pre-War East Asia: A 1934-36 Benchmark Purchasing Power Parity Comparison with the U.S.

This article provides estimates of purchasing power parity (PPP) converters for expenditure side GDP of Japan/China and Japan/U.S through a detailed matching of prices for more than 50 types of goods and services in private consumption and about 20 items or sectors for investment and government expenditure. Based on our finding and linking with the earlier studies on the relative price levels of Taiwan and Korea, we derive the mid-1930s benchmark PPP adjusted per capita income of Japan, China, Taiwan and Korea at 31%, 10%, 23%, and 12% of the U.S. level respectively for the mid-1930s. These estimates corrected the consistent downward bias in East Asian income levels based on market exchange rate conversions. While confirming Angus Maddison's estimates for China and Taiwan based on the 1990 benchmark back-projection method, they do point to a 23% and 85% overestimate in his comparable figures for Japan and Korea respectively for the mid-1930s period. This article develops a preliminary theoretical and empirical framework to demonstrate the possible source of the biases in the back-projection method. We briefly discuss the implications of our findings on the initial conditions and long-term growth dynamics in East Asia and beyond.

International Comparison in Historical Perspective: Reconstructing the 1934-36 Benchmark Purchasing Power Parity for Japan, Korea and Taiwan

This article provides the first expenditure approach estimate of purchasing power parity (PPP) converters for 1934-36 Japan, Korea and Taiwan. We matched all together 70 to 80 types of goods and services for private consumption, government expenditure and investment using three levels of weights derived from actual expenditure surveys. We find that the 1934-6 average prices of Korea for private consumption, investment and government expenditure were about 0.86, 0.89 and 0.98 times that of Japan respectively; and for Taiwan 0.84, 0.87 and 0.95 respectively. This gives the 1934-6 Korea and Taiwan overall GDE average price levels of 0.87 and 0.86 respectively that of Japan. Our new benchmark estimate is an improvement over existing converters based either on exchange rates or the 1990 backward projection method, which was embedded with index number biases. It provides a vital link for a long-term overview of structural change, ethnic income distribution and the historical convergence or divergence for these three economies in the past century.

International Comparison in Historical Perspective: Reconstructing the 1934-36 Benchmark Purchasing Power Parity for Japan, Korea and Taiwan

This paper provides the first estimate of consumption purchasing power parity (PPP) converters for 1934-36 Japan, Korea and Taiwan by matching prices of more than 50 types of goods and services with consumption weights derived from household expenditure surveys. We find that the 1934-6 average consumer prices of Korea and Taiwan were about 0.86 and 0.84 times that of Japan respectively. Using our new benchmark estimate, we make a theoretical and empirical investigation on the possible sources of biases in existing estimates based on the exchange rate conversion and the 1990 backward projected method. Our estimate provides a vital link that allows us to conduct an overall review of structural change, ethnic income distribution and the historical trend of economic convergence or divergence for these three economies in the past century.

Comparative Output and Labour Productivity in Manufacturing for China, Japan, Korea and the United States in Circa 1935 by a Production PPP Approach

Following the standard methodology for measuring industry-of-origin or production-side PPPs, this study compares the unit values of manufacturing products in China, Japan, Korea and the US to calculate unit value ratios (UVRs) and hence estimates PPPs for individual manufacturing industries using the US as the base country in circa 1935. Based on the products that could be matched between these countries, the estimated manufacturing production PPPs for China, Japan and Korea are only from half to two thirds of the prevailing market exchange rates, suggesting much lower cost of production in manufacturing in these countries than in the US. The estimated PPPs are used to calculate industry-level output and labour productivity in China, Japan and Korea relative to those of the US in circa 1935. The results show that the size of factory manufacturing in Japan was 12 percent of the US level whereas in China it was only one percent and even lower in Korea. In terms of comparative labour productivity, measured as PPP$ per hour worked with the US as the reference, Japanese and Korean manufacturing was 24 and 23 percent of the US level, whereas Chinese manufacturing was only 7 percent of the US level.Production (industry-of-origin) purchasing power parity (PPP), unit value ratio, comparative output and labour productivity, comparative advantage, economic development

Comparative Output and Labour Productivity in Manufacturing for China, Japan, Korea and the United States in Circa 1935 by a Production PPP Approach

Following the standard methodology for measuring industry-of-origin or productionside PPPs, this study compares the unit values of manufacturing products in China, Japan, Korea and the US to calculate unit value ratios (UVRs) and hence estimates PPPs for individual manufacturing industries using the US as the base country in circa 1935. Based on the products that could be matched between these countries, the estimated manufacturing production PPPs for China, Japan and Korea are only from half to two thirds of the prevailing market exchange rates, suggesting much lower cost of production in manufacturing in these countries than in the US. The estimated PPPs are used to calculate industry-level output and labour productivity in China, Japan and Korea relative to those of the US in circa 1935. The results show that the size of factory manufacturing in Japan was 12 percent of the US level whereas in China it was only one percent and even lower in Korea. In terms of comparative labour productivity, measured as PPP$ per hour worked with the US as the reference, Japanese and Korean manufacturing was 24 and 23 percent of the US level, whereas Chinese manufacturing was only 7 percent of the US level.Production (industry-of-origin) purchasing power parity (PPP), unit value ratio, comparative output and labour productivity, comparative advantage, economic development

An International Comparison of the TFP Levels and the Productivity Convergence of Japanese, Korean, Taiwanese and Chinese Listed Firms

In this paper, we analyzed productivity catching up at the firm level in the Japanese, Korean, Taiwanese and Chinese manufacturing sector using the distance from the global technological frontier as a direct measure of the potential for technological frontier. We also examined the role of the absorption capacity for the technological catch-up by including the variables, such as R&D expenditure and foreign ownership in our empirical estimation model. Our main results can be summarized as follows. First, although Japanese firms enjoy the highest average TFP level in many industries, their TFP growth rate has been relatively low during the past two decades. Taiwanese and Korean firms have achieved considerably high TFP growth in certain industries, and the some firms in the industries almost caught up or exceeded the Japanese firms' TFP level. The average TFP level of Chinese firms is still much lower than that of Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese firms in many industries. Second, in Korea, the TFP levels of low-performing firms are approaching those of the national frontier firms at a more rapid pace than in other countries. In addition, Korean firms try to catch up the global frontier once they reached to the national frontier level TFP. Chinese firms are very slow in catching up and the only engine of the knowledge creation is firms located in the trade-oriented coast. Third, in the all four countries, the speed of the convergence of the firms far from the national frontier is faster than the firms near the frontier.

An International Comparison of the TFP Levels and the Productivity Convergence of Japanese, Korean, Taiwanese, and Chinese Listed Firms (Extended Version)

Focusing on Japanese, Korean, Taiwanese, and Chinese firms in the manufacturing sector, this paper examines productivity catch-up at the firm level using the distance from the technology frontier as a direct measure of the potential for catch-up. We also examine the role of absorptive capacity for technological catch-up by including variables such as R&D expenditure and foreign ownership in our empirical estimation. We find that the national frontier has a stronger pull on domestic firms than the regional frontier, which is in line with findings by Bartelsman, Haskel and Martin (2008). This result indicates that policies to raise the technology level of national frontier firms are beneficial for all firms in that country.productivity, catch-up, absorptive capacity

Regional Inequality and Industrial Structures in Pre-War Japan: An Analysis Based on New Prefectural GDP Estimates

Studies comparing regional income in Japan before and after World War II have frequently drawn a picture of radical change from an economy characterized by large regional disparities to one characterized by small regional disparities. This paper comes to a very different conclusion. Based on estimates of prefecture-level value added for five benchmark years from 1890 to 1940 (a detailed description of our estimation methodology is provided), we examine trends in the gap of economic development between prefectures during the pre-war period and find that this gap was much smaller than claimed in preceding studies and, in fact, not much greater than during the post-war period. Observing, moreover, a decline in inter-prefectural differences in terms of per-capita gross value added during the pre-war period, we conduct a factor analysis and find that a major reason for this decline was a decline in inter-prefectural differences in same-industry labor productivity. Thus, the picture of modern Japan's economic development presented here is very different from the one painted by preceding studies.

A Comparative Analysis of Productivity Growth and Productivity Dispersion: Microeconomic Evidence Based on Listed Firms from Japan, Korea, and China

Utilizing the firm-level dataset, this study aims to explore differences in firm-level productivity and growth between Japan, Korea, and China, while at the same time illuminating the mechanism that has driven the narrowing in the productivity gap that can be observed. We pursue two strategies. First, we compare the firm-level TFP distribution of major industries in these three countries over time to examine catch-up patterns within and across industries. Second, in order to examine patterns of technology diffusion across these three countries, we conduct a regression analysis on TFP convergence to the national frontier and to the global frontier. Our main results can be summarized as follows. First, although Japanese firms enjoy the highest average TFP level in many industries, their TFP growth rate has been relatively low during the past two decades. Korean firms have achieved considerable TFP growth in certain industries. The average TFP level of Chinese firms is still much lower than that of Japanese and Korean firms in many industries. Second, within-industry dispersion of TFP levels is very small for Japanese firms. While the within-industry ranking of TFP levels hardly changes in the case of Japan, fluctuations in the ranking are relatively frequent in the case of Korea. Third, in Korea, the TFP levels of low-performing firms are approaching those of the national frontier firms at a more rapid pace than in Japan