The Experts below are selected from a list of 73698 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Carsten Burhop - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Resolving the Anglo-German Industrial Productivity Puzzle, 1895–1935: A Response to Professor Ritschl
The Journal of Economic History, 2008Co-Authors: Stephen Broadberry, Carsten BurhopAbstract:This response offers a critical appraisal of the claim of Albrecht Ritschl to have found a possible resolution to what he calls the Anglo-German Industrial Productivity puzzle, which arose as the result of a new Industrial production index produced in an earlier paper by the same author. Projection back from a widely accepted 1935/36 benchmark using the Ritschl index showed German Industrial labor Productivity in 1907 substantially higher than in Britain. This presented a puzzle for at least two reasons. First, other comparative information from the pre—World War I period, such as wages, seems difficult to square with much higher German labor Productivity at this time. Second, a direct benchmark estimate produced by Stephen Broadberry and Carsten Burhop, using production census information for Britain and Industrial survey material of similar quality for Germany, suggested broadly equal labor Productivity in 1907. Broadberry and Burhop also showed that if Walther Hoffmann's Industrial output index was used instead of the Ritschl index for Germany, the puzzle largely disappeared.
-
Resolving the Anglo-German Industrial Productivity Puzzle, 1895-1935: A Response to Professor Ritschl
The Journal of Economic History, 2008Co-Authors: Stephen Broadberry, Carsten BurhopAbstract:This paper offers a critical appraisal of the claim of Ritschl (2008) to have found a “possible resolution” to what he calls the “Anglo-German Industrial Productivity puzzle”. To understand the origins of this term, it is necessary to describe some recent developments in comparisons of Industrial labour Productivity between Britain and Germany. The Anglo-German Industrial Productivity puzzle really arose as the result of a new Industrial production index produced by Ritschl (2004), which differed very substantially from the widely used index of Hoffmann (1965). Broadberry and Burhop (2007) pointed out that if the Ritschl (2004) index is combined with an index of German employment from Hoffmann (1965) and time series of UK output and employment from Feinstein (1972), it implies an implausibly high German labour Productivity lead over Britain in 1907, when projected back from a widely accepted Germany/UK labour Productivity benchmark for 1935/36.
-
Industrial production and Industrial Productivity in the German Empire
2005Co-Authors: Carsten BurhopAbstract:"In a series of papers and in a major book, Stephen Broadberry investigates the comparative Productivity development of the British, US, and German economy. A central part of his analysis is the comparison of Industrial Productivity. Broadberry shows that the comparative Industrial Productivity is remarkably stable between the three economies over time and that the major reason for an “overtaking” of Britain by Germany in the late 19th and early 20th century is structural change from agriculture towards industry in Germany. Yet, Industrial Productivity in Germany was not far ahead of Britain’s in 1913. A precondition for such an international comparison is reliable Industrial production data. In a recent paper Burhop / Wolff (2005) present new estimates of the German net national product and of Germany’s Industrial production for the years 1851-1913. These findings could have a major influence on international comparisons since a higher German Industrial production and Industrial Productivity for 1913 and the decades before are hypothesized. The current paper further investigates the calculation of production indices for 13 industry groups (including mining and construction) in Germany during 1871 and World War I. In addition, labour Productivity estimations based on sectoral studies (metal production, metal processing, chemical industry, textiles, building materials and mining) are included. Furthermore, the assumptions made by Hoffmann (1965) to extrapolate his 1913 production values backwards to 1870 are discussed and partly improved by using evidence from more recent historical findings and by employing contemporary data for single industries. Additional information is included into new time series extrapolations, confirming a higher level of Industrial production and Industrial Productivity in Germany. Especially, Hoffmann (1965) significantly underestimated production in metal processing, but also in metal production and chemical industry. On the other hand, Hoffmann’s estimates for textiles, building materials, and mining are confirmed. Overall, the level of Industrial production was higher in 1913 Germany than suggested by Hoffmann’s data, but less than suggested by Burhop / Wolff (2005). However, the time-series extrapolation of Industrial production backwards to 1871 confirms the index constructed by Burhop / Wolff. Thus, the level of Industrial production was higher than the traditional estimates by Hoffmann (1965) and Wagenfuhr (1933) suggest. Furthermore, the cyclical behaviour of the new index of Industrial production and of its components is investigated employing the Hodrick-Prescott-Filter. The results indicate a stable pattern of business cycle peaks and bottoms throughout the period under investigation. The major boom during 1871-74 and the following downturn are mainly driven by the construction sector; other industries do not exhibit extraordinary fluctuations. In addition, a prolonged stagnation between 1873 and 1896 – the so-called “Great depression” – is not confirmed by the new index. Finally, the VAR based Toda-Yamamoto causality test is employed to detect leading sectors of Germany’s Industrialization process. So far, especially Railways and joint-stock credit-banks are considered as leading sectors during Germany’s early phase of Industrialization. We will test the leading sector hypothesis for twelve industry groups using non-structural VARs and by employing impulse-response-analysis."
Anwar Shah - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
DYNAMICS OF PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE, Industrial Productivity AND PROFITABILITY. IN: TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE
2002Co-Authors: Anwar ShahAbstract:A restricted equilibrium framework is utilized to estimate the contribution of public investment in infrastructure to private sector profitability. A restricted cost function in translog form which treats labor and materials as variable inputs and private capital/public sector capital stock in transport, communications, and electricity as quasi-fixed inputs is specified. A system of non-linear equations comprising variable cost function and derived input demand equations is estimated using data from 1970-87 for 26 Mexican 3-digit manufacturing industries. The divergence of private and public capital stocks from their static equilibrium levels is determined. The net rate of return to fixed factors is also calculated. Estimates of allocative efficiency are derived. The study also gives estimates of short- and long-run scale economies, output elasticity of factors, measures of Productivity growth, and technical change. Economically significant and policy implications of the findings are given.
-
Dynamics of Public Infrastructure, Industrial Productivity and Profitability
The Review of Economics and Statistics, 1992Co-Authors: Anwar ShahAbstract:A restricted equilibrium framework is utilized to estimate the contribution of public investment in infrastructure to private sector profitability. A restricted cost function in translog form which treats labor and materials as variable inputs and private capital and public sector capital stock in transportation, communications and electricity as quasi-fixed inputs is specified. A system of non-linear equations comprising variable cost function and derived input demand equations is estimated using data from 1970 to 1987 for twenty-six Mexican three-digit manufacturing industries. The divergence of private and public capital stocks from their static equilibrium levels is estimated. The net rate of return to fixed factors is also calculated. Estimates of allocative efficiency are derived. The study further provides estimates of short-run and long-run scale economies, output elasticity of factors, measures of Productivity growth and technical change. Economic significance and policy implications of the findings are also presented. Copyright 1992 by MIT Press.
Stephen Broadberry - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Resolving the Anglo-German Industrial Productivity Puzzle, 1895–1935: A Response to Professor Ritschl
The Journal of Economic History, 2008Co-Authors: Stephen Broadberry, Carsten BurhopAbstract:This response offers a critical appraisal of the claim of Albrecht Ritschl to have found a possible resolution to what he calls the Anglo-German Industrial Productivity puzzle, which arose as the result of a new Industrial production index produced in an earlier paper by the same author. Projection back from a widely accepted 1935/36 benchmark using the Ritschl index showed German Industrial labor Productivity in 1907 substantially higher than in Britain. This presented a puzzle for at least two reasons. First, other comparative information from the pre—World War I period, such as wages, seems difficult to square with much higher German labor Productivity at this time. Second, a direct benchmark estimate produced by Stephen Broadberry and Carsten Burhop, using production census information for Britain and Industrial survey material of similar quality for Germany, suggested broadly equal labor Productivity in 1907. Broadberry and Burhop also showed that if Walther Hoffmann's Industrial output index was used instead of the Ritschl index for Germany, the puzzle largely disappeared.
-
Resolving the Anglo-German Industrial Productivity Puzzle, 1895-1935: A Response to Professor Ritschl
The Journal of Economic History, 2008Co-Authors: Stephen Broadberry, Carsten BurhopAbstract:This paper offers a critical appraisal of the claim of Ritschl (2008) to have found a “possible resolution” to what he calls the “Anglo-German Industrial Productivity puzzle”. To understand the origins of this term, it is necessary to describe some recent developments in comparisons of Industrial labour Productivity between Britain and Germany. The Anglo-German Industrial Productivity puzzle really arose as the result of a new Industrial production index produced by Ritschl (2004), which differed very substantially from the widely used index of Hoffmann (1965). Broadberry and Burhop (2007) pointed out that if the Ritschl (2004) index is combined with an index of German employment from Hoffmann (1965) and time series of UK output and employment from Feinstein (1972), it implies an implausibly high German labour Productivity lead over Britain in 1907, when projected back from a widely accepted Germany/UK labour Productivity benchmark for 1935/36.
Peter S Lindquist - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Transportation Infrastructure, Industrial Productivity, and Return on Investment
Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2013Co-Authors: Jeffrey J Eloff, Oleg Smirnov, Peter S LindquistAbstract:This study examined the North American Industrial Classification System\nbased manufacturing industry (NAICS 31-33) from 1997 to 2010 in a\ncost-based framework. First, both profit and production function models\nwere constructed and estimated for the U.S. manufacturing industry at\nthe state level to allow for spatial spillovers and interactions. A\nmodel based on profit and production provided an alternative approach to\nthe dual-cost function. Elasticities associated with infrastructure\ninvestment and industry total costs were determined by the inclusion of\ndata on transportation infrastructure spending. Results of the spatial\neconometric models and the computed elasticities were then delivered in\na geographic information system.
Muhammad Afzal - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Trade Liberalisation and Industrial Productivity: Evidence from Manufacturing Industries in Pakistan
The Pakistan Development Review, 2017Co-Authors: Gulzar Ahmed, Muhammad Arshad Khan, Tahir Mahmood, Muhammad AfzalAbstract:This study examines the impact of trade liberalisation on the Industrial Productivity for a panel of twenty seven 3-digit manufacturing industries in Pakistan over the period 1980-2006. Using a variant of the Cobb-Douglas production function for Industrial sector, we estimated output elasticities. The results show positive output elasticities with respect to labour, capital and raw materials for the pre-trade liberalisation period (1981 –1995) as well as post-trade liberalisation period (1996-2006). For the pre-liberalisation period, we observe positive output elasticity with respect to energy, while it turns out to be negative in the post-liberalisation period probably due to energy crisis in Pakistan. In the second stage, we calculate total factor Productivity (TFP) and examine the impact of trade liberalisation on TFP for pre-and post-trade liberalisation periods. The results reveal that trade liberalisation proxied by import duty has positive but negligible impact on the TFP in the pre-as well as post-liberalisation periods. On the other hand, effective rates of protection exert large negative impact on the TFP in the post-liberalisation than the pre-liberalisation period. JEL Classifications: F14, F13, O53, L60 Keywords: Trade Liberalisation, Total Factor Productivity, Manufacturing Sector of Pakistan
-
Trade Liberalization and Industrial Productivity: Evidence from Pakistan
2015Co-Authors: Gulzar Ahmed, Muhammad Arshad Khan, Muhammad AfzalAbstract:This study examines the impact of trade liberalization on Industrial Productivity for a panel of twenty seven 3-digit manufacturing industries in Pakistan over the period 1980-2006. Following Olley and Pack’s (1996) Control Function Approach (CFA) we deal with the endogeneity arises from unobserved Productivity shocks. Using a variant of Cobb-Douglas production function, in the first step we estimate output elasticities. We find positive output elasticities with respect to labor, capital and raw materials for the pre-trade liberalization period (1981-1995) and post-trade liberalization period (1996-2006). For the pre-liberalization, we observed positive output elasticity with respect to energy, while it turns out to be negative in the post-liberalization period; probably due to energy crisis in Pakistan. In the second stage, we estimate total factor Productivity (TFP) and examine the impact of trade liberalization on TFP for pre-and post-trade liberalization regimes. The results reveal that trade liberalization proxied by excise duty has positive but negligible impact on TFP in the pre-as well as post-liberalization periods. On the other hand, effective rate of protection exerts large negative impact on TFP in the post-liberalization than the pre-liberalization period.