Showing papers by "Francisco J. Buera published in 2009"

The Rise of the Service Economy

Abstract: This paper analyzes the role of specialized high-skilled labor in the growth of the service sector as a share of the total economy. Empirically, we emphasize that the growth has been driven by the consumption of services. Rather than being driven by low-skill jobs, the importance of skill-intensive services has risen, and this has coincided with a period of rising relative wages and quantities of high-skilled labor. We develop a theory where demand shifts toward ever more skill-intensive output as income rises, and because skills are highly specialized this lowers the importance of home production relative to market services. The theory is also consistent with a rising level of skill and skill premium, a rising relative price of services that is linked to this skill premium, and rich product cycles between home and market, all of which are observed in the data.

Can traditional theories of structural change fit the data

Abstract: Two traditional explanations for structural changes are sector-biased technological progress and non-homothetic preferences. This paper integrates both into an otherwise standard growth model and quantitatively evaluates them vis-a-vis time series. The exercise identifies a set of puzzles for standard theories: (i) the model cannot account for the steep decline in manufacturing and rise in services in the later data; (ii) the standard model requires implausibly low elasticity of substitution across goods to match the consumption and output data; and (iii) the behavior of consumption and output shares differs significantly from that of employment shares. We argue that models that incorporate home production, sector-specific factor distortions, and differences across sectors in the accumulation of human capital are promising avenues to amend the standard models. (JEL: O11, O14, O41)

A dynamic model of entrepreneurship with borrowing constraints: theory and evidence

Abstract: Does wealth beget wealth and entrepreneurship, or is entrepreneurship mainly determined by an individual’s ability? A large literature studies the relationship between wealth and entry to entrepreneurship to inform this question. This paper shows that in a dynamic model, the existence of financial constraints to the creation of businesses implies a non-monotonic relationship between wealth and entry into entrepreneurship: the probability of becoming an entrepreneur as a function of wealth is increasing for low wealth levels—as predicted by standard static models—but it is decreasing for higher wealth levels. U.S. data are used to study the qualitative and quantitative predictions of the dynamic model. The welfare costs of borrowing constraints are found to be significant, around 6% of lifetime consumption, and are mainly due to undercapitalized entrepreneurs (intensive margin), rather than to able people not starting businesses (extensive margin).

Productivity Growth and Capital Flows: The Dynamics of Reforms

Abstract: Why doesn't capital flow into fast-growing countries? In this paper, we provide a quantitative framework incorporating heterogeneous producers and underdeveloped domestic financial markets to study the joint dynamics of total factor productivity (TFP) and capital flows. When an unexpected once-and-for-all reform eliminates non-financial distortions and liberalizes capital flows, the TFP of our model economy rises gradually and capital flows out of it. The rise in TFP reflects efficient reallocation of capital and talent, a process drawn out by frictions in domestic financial markets. The concurrent capital outflows are driven by the positive response of domestic saving to higher returns, and by the sluggish response of domestic investment to the higher TFP--the latter being another ramification of domestic financial frictions. We use our model to analyze the welfare consequences of opening up capital accounts. We find that the marginal welfare effect of capital account liberalization is negative for workers and positive for entrepreneurs and wealthy individuals.

Finance and development: a tale of two sectors

Abstract: Income differences across countries primarily reflect differences in total factor productivity (TFP). More disaggregated data show that the TFP gap between rich and poor countries varies systematically across industrial sectors of the economy: Poor countries are particularly unproductive in tradable and investment goods sectors. In this paper, we develop a quantitatively-oriented framework to explain such cross-country patterns in aggregate and sectoral TFP. We start by documenting that an important distinction between sectors is their average establishment size. For example, establishments in tradable and investment goods sectors operate at much larger scales than those in the non-tradable sector. In our model, sectors with larger scales of operation have more financing needs, and are hence disproportionately affected by financial frictions. Our quantitative exercises show that financial frictions account for a substantial part of the observed cross-country patterns in TFP, both at the aggregate and at the sectoral level. Our model also has novel implications for the impact of financial frictions on the relative scale between the tradable and the non-tradable sectors, which are shown to be consistent with the data.

Productivity Growth and Capital Flows: The Dynamics of Reforms

Abstract: Why doesn't capital flow into fast-growing countries? In this paper, we provide a quantitative framework incorporating heterogeneous producers and underdeveloped domestic financial markets to study the joint dynamics of total factor productivity (TFP) and capital flows. When an unexpected once-and-for-all reform eliminates non-financial distortions and liberalizes capital flows, the TFP of our model economy rises gradually and capital flows out of it. The rise in TFP reflects efficient reallocation of capital and talent, a process drawn out by frictions in domestic financial markets. The concurrent capital outflows are driven by the positive response of domestic saving to higher returns, and by the sluggish response of domestic investment to the higher TFP--the latter being another ramification of domestic financial frictions. We use our model to analyze the welfare consequences of opening up capital accounts. We find that the marginal welfare effect of capital account liberalization is negative for workers and positive for entrepreneurs and wealthy individuals.