Publication: Essays in trade, innovation and productivity
Loading...
Identifiers
Publication date
2013
Defense date
2013-06-11
Authors
Advisors
Tutors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Impact
Export
Abstract
Mi tesis se centra en el Comercio Internacional y Macroeconomía Aplicada. Mi investigación actual se ocupa de los efectos de las políticas comerciales y de innovación sobre las decisiones de las empresas y su impacto en el bienestar de la economía. El primer capítulo, titulado “Trade and Process Innovation: Extensive and Intensive Margin”, considera un modelo de comercio con empresas heterogéneas que no sólo deciden cuándo y cuánto exportar sino también cuándo y cuánto innovar. Aunque la literatura siempre ha reconocido la interdependencia entre la innovación y el comercio, hasta ahora no ha analizado el impacto de la liberalización del comercio sobre la productividad y el bienestar en un modelo que incorpore los márgenes extensivos e intensivos tanto del comercio como de la innovación. El objetivo principal de este capítulo es mostrar que la introducción de estos márgenes diferentes es clave para entender el impacto de la liberalización del comercio. Distintos equilibrios pueden darse en función de los costes relativos del comercio y la innovación. En una economía con costes comerciales bajos en relación con los costes de la innovación, empresas con una productividad media exportan pero no innovan, mientras que en una economía con costes comerciales altos en relación con los costes de innovación, las empresas con una productividad media innovan pero no exportan. En un tercer equilibrio, en medio de los otros dos, algunas empresas con una productividad media exportan e innovan, mientras que otras ni exportan ni innovan. En el segundo capítulo, titulado “Trade, Process Innovation and Productivity: A Quantitative Analysis of Europe”, se muestra que los distintos equilibrios teóricos descritos en el primer capítulo son cuantitativamente posibles a través de una calibración del modelo para cinco países europeos (Francia , Alemania, Italia, España y Reino Unido), utilizando los datos a nivel de empresas del proyecto European Firms in a Global Economy (EFIGE). A continuación, muestro que el impacto de la liberalización del comercio sobre la productividad agregada y el bienestar depende crucialmente del equilibrio en el que se encuentra la economía. El primer ejercicio cuantitativo consiste en estimar el efecto de una reducción de los costes comerciales variables sobre la productividad agregada y 5 el bienestar. Atkeson y Burstein (2010) encuentran que permitir a las empresas innovar no cambia los beneficios del comercio, ya que la mayor intensidad en la innovación de las empresas exportadoras se compensa con la disminución de la intensidad en la innovación de las empresas no exportadoras. A pesar de encontrar resultados similares generalmente, en las economías donde el comercio es caro en relación con la innovación, la disminución de los costes del comercio variables hace que sea más difícil para las empresas nacionales innovar. En comparación con Atkeson y Burstein (2010), este efecto negativo proveniente del margen extensivo de la innovación puede dar lugar a pérdidas de bienestar. El segundo ejercicio cuantitativo se centra en los efectos sobre el bienestar de la reducción de los costes fijos del comercio o la innovación. Encuentro que una reducción de los costes fijos de comercio no siempre tiene un efecto positivo. En particular, en una economía en la que muchas empresas exportan, pero pocas empresas innovan, al reducir los costes fijos de comercio, aumenta el número de exportadores, y puede hacer que la innovación sea más cara, lo que disminuye la productividad agregada. Estos resultados subrayan la importancia de contar con un modelo que analiza conjuntamente los márgenes extensivos e intensivos de comercio y de la innovación. No hacerlo no sólo daría lugar a una estructura teórica menos rica, sino que también nos impediría evaluar correctamente el impacto de diferentes políticas destinadas a fomentar el comercio y la innovación. En el tercer capítulo, titulado “Understanding Competitiveness” y conjunto con Rubén Segura Cayuela, se analizan los factores que impulsan la evolución de los costes laborales totales unitarios (CLU), el principal indicador de la competitividad europea, en Francia, Alemania, Italia y España. Utilizando datos a nivel de empresas, calculamos un cambio ponderado de los CLU agregados entre 2002 y 2007, y lo descomponemos en tres elementos principales: el primero captura los cambios a nivel de empresa de los costes laborales unitarios, manteniendo las cuotas iniciales del mercado interno de las empresas constante; el segundo cuantifica la reasignación de cuotas de mercado en la economía nacional, manteniendo los costes laborales unitarios iniciales constantes; y el tercero mide la interacción entre las dos primeros elementos. Los resultados indican que la evolución de los CLU agregados no se debe a la evolución de los CLU a nivel de empresa, y por lo tanto falla en capturar adecuadamente la heterogeneidad existente a nivel de empresa. En cambio, la evolución de los CLU agregados es impulsada por la reasignación de recursos entre las empresas de la economía. Motivados por el importante papel de la reasignación de recursos para explicar la evolución de los CLU agregados, aplicamos la metodología de Hsieh y Klenow (2009) para 6 cuantificar la medida en que las diferencias de productividad en Europa se deben a una asignación ineficiente de los recursos. Como resultado de las distorsiones que afectan la producción, las empresas producen diferentes cantidades que lo dictaría su productividad. Una asignación eficiente de los recursos aumentaría la TFP manufacturera agregada en 2008 un 22, 7% en Francia, 27, 9% en Alemania, 43, 5% en Italia y 28, 2% en España. El análisis empírico de los costes laborales unitarios como medida competitividad, pone de manifiesto la necesidad de utilizar datos microeconómicos para entender los factores que impulsan la evolución de los agregados macroeconómicos
My Dissertation focuses on International Trade and Applied Macroeconomics. My current research deals with the effects of trade and innovation policies on firms’ decisions and their impact on the welfare of the economy. The first chapter, entitled “Trade and Process Innovation: Extensive and Intensive Margin”, considers a trade model with heterogeneous firms that decide not just whether and how much to export but also whether and how much to innovate. While the literature has long recognized the interdependence between innovation and trade, it has so far not analyzed the impact of trade liberalization on productivity and welfare in a model that incorporates both the extensive and intensive margins of both trade and innovation. The main point of the chapter is to show that introducing these different margins is key for understanding the impact of trade liberalization. Different equilibria may arise, depending on the relative costs of trade and innovation. In an economy with trade costs that are low relative to innovation costs, medium productivity firms export without innovating, whereas in an economy with trade costs that are high relative to innovation costs, medium productivity firms innovate without exporting. In a third equilibrium, in between the other two, some medium productivity firms export and innovate, whereas others neither export nor innovate. In the second chapter, entitled “Trade, Process Innovation and Productivity: A Quantitative Analysis of Europe”, I show that the theoretical equilibria discussed in the first chapter are quantitatively plausible by calibrating the model to five European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain and United Kingdom) using the firm-level data set European Firms in a Global Economy (EFIGE). I then show that the impact of trade liberalization on aggregate productivity and welfare depends crucially on the equilibrium the economy is in. A first quantitative exercise consists of estimating the effect of a reduction in variable trade costs on aggregate productivity and welfare. Atkeson and Burstein (2010) find that allowing for firms to innovate does not change the gains from trade, since the increased innovation intensity of the exporting firms is offset by the decreased innovation intensity of non-exporting firms. Although I find overall similar results, in economies where trade is expensive relative to innovation, a drop in variable trade costs makes it harder for domestic firms to innovate. Compared to Atkeson and Burstein (2010), this negative effect coming from the extensive margin of innovation may lead to welfare losses. A second quantitative exercise focuses on the welfare effects of lowering the fixed costs of trade or innovation. I find that a drop in fixed trade costs need not always have a positive effect. Indeed, in an economy in which many firms export, but few firms innovate, lowering the fixed costs of trade, by increasing the number of exporters, may make innovating more expensive, thus lowering aggregate productivity. These findings stress the importance of having a model that jointly analyzes the extensive and intensive margins of both trade and innovation. Not doing so would not just result in a less rich theoretical structure, it would also keep us from correctly assessing the impact of different policies aimed at fomenting trade and innovation. In the third chapter, entitled “Understanding Competitiveness” and joint with Rubén Segura Cayuela, we analyze the factors that drive the evolution of the aggregate Unit Labor Costs(ULC), the main European competitiveness indicator, in France, Germany, Italy and Spain. Using firm level data we calculate a weighted change of the aggregate ULC between 2002 and 2007, and decompose it into three main elements: the first captures changes in firm-level unit labor costs, keeping the initial domestic market shares of firms constant; the second quantifies the reallocation of market shares within the domestic economy, keeping the initial unit labor costs constant; and the third measures the interaction between the first two. The results suggest that the evolution of the aggregate ULC is not driven by the evolution of the firm level ULC, and therefore fails at capturing adequately the heterogeneity existent at the firm level. Instead, the evolution of the ULC is driven by the reallocation of resources among the firms of the economy. Motivated by the significant role of the reallocation of resources to explain the evolution of the aggregate ULC, we apply the methodology of Hsieh and Klenow (2009) to quantify how much of the differences in productivity in Europe is due to an inefficient allocation of resources. As a result of distortions that affect production, firms produce different amounts that what would be dictated by their productivity. An efficient allocation of resources would boost aggregate manufacturing TFP in 2008 by 22.7% in France, 27.9% in Germany, 43.5% in Italy and 28.2% in Spain. The empirical analysis of the unit labor costs as a competitiveness measure, reveals the need to use microeconomic data to understand the driving factors behind the evolution of macroeconomic aggregates
My Dissertation focuses on International Trade and Applied Macroeconomics. My current research deals with the effects of trade and innovation policies on firms’ decisions and their impact on the welfare of the economy. The first chapter, entitled “Trade and Process Innovation: Extensive and Intensive Margin”, considers a trade model with heterogeneous firms that decide not just whether and how much to export but also whether and how much to innovate. While the literature has long recognized the interdependence between innovation and trade, it has so far not analyzed the impact of trade liberalization on productivity and welfare in a model that incorporates both the extensive and intensive margins of both trade and innovation. The main point of the chapter is to show that introducing these different margins is key for understanding the impact of trade liberalization. Different equilibria may arise, depending on the relative costs of trade and innovation. In an economy with trade costs that are low relative to innovation costs, medium productivity firms export without innovating, whereas in an economy with trade costs that are high relative to innovation costs, medium productivity firms innovate without exporting. In a third equilibrium, in between the other two, some medium productivity firms export and innovate, whereas others neither export nor innovate. In the second chapter, entitled “Trade, Process Innovation and Productivity: A Quantitative Analysis of Europe”, I show that the theoretical equilibria discussed in the first chapter are quantitatively plausible by calibrating the model to five European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain and United Kingdom) using the firm-level data set European Firms in a Global Economy (EFIGE). I then show that the impact of trade liberalization on aggregate productivity and welfare depends crucially on the equilibrium the economy is in. A first quantitative exercise consists of estimating the effect of a reduction in variable trade costs on aggregate productivity and welfare. Atkeson and Burstein (2010) find that allowing for firms to innovate does not change the gains from trade, since the increased innovation intensity of the exporting firms is offset by the decreased innovation intensity of non-exporting firms. Although I find overall similar results, in economies where trade is expensive relative to innovation, a drop in variable trade costs makes it harder for domestic firms to innovate. Compared to Atkeson and Burstein (2010), this negative effect coming from the extensive margin of innovation may lead to welfare losses. A second quantitative exercise focuses on the welfare effects of lowering the fixed costs of trade or innovation. I find that a drop in fixed trade costs need not always have a positive effect. Indeed, in an economy in which many firms export, but few firms innovate, lowering the fixed costs of trade, by increasing the number of exporters, may make innovating more expensive, thus lowering aggregate productivity. These findings stress the importance of having a model that jointly analyzes the extensive and intensive margins of both trade and innovation. Not doing so would not just result in a less rich theoretical structure, it would also keep us from correctly assessing the impact of different policies aimed at fomenting trade and innovation. In the third chapter, entitled “Understanding Competitiveness” and joint with Rubén Segura Cayuela, we analyze the factors that drive the evolution of the aggregate Unit Labor Costs(ULC), the main European competitiveness indicator, in France, Germany, Italy and Spain. Using firm level data we calculate a weighted change of the aggregate ULC between 2002 and 2007, and decompose it into three main elements: the first captures changes in firm-level unit labor costs, keeping the initial domestic market shares of firms constant; the second quantifies the reallocation of market shares within the domestic economy, keeping the initial unit labor costs constant; and the third measures the interaction between the first two. The results suggest that the evolution of the aggregate ULC is not driven by the evolution of the firm level ULC, and therefore fails at capturing adequately the heterogeneity existent at the firm level. Instead, the evolution of the ULC is driven by the reallocation of resources among the firms of the economy. Motivated by the significant role of the reallocation of resources to explain the evolution of the aggregate ULC, we apply the methodology of Hsieh and Klenow (2009) to quantify how much of the differences in productivity in Europe is due to an inefficient allocation of resources. As a result of distortions that affect production, firms produce different amounts that what would be dictated by their productivity. An efficient allocation of resources would boost aggregate manufacturing TFP in 2008 by 22.7% in France, 27.9% in Germany, 43.5% in Italy and 28.2% in Spain. The empirical analysis of the unit labor costs as a competitiveness measure, reveals the need to use microeconomic data to understand the driving factors behind the evolution of macroeconomic aggregates
Description
Keywords
Comercio internacional, Política comercial, Decisión en la empresa, Aspecto económico