scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

WTO Accession and Performance of Chinese Manufacturing Firms

01 Sep 2017-The American Economic Review (American Economic Association)-Vol. 107, Iss: 9, pp 2784-2820
TL;DR: The Journal of Comparative Economics (JCE) as discussed by the authors has published a survey on comparative economics in 2012, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2016 and 2017.
Abstract: 王璐航系厦门大学经济学科2012年新引进的助理教授,博士毕业于加拿大多伦多大学经济系,主要研究兴趣为中国经济、国际贸易与应用微观经济学。其论文曾在比较经济学国际重要期刊Journal of Comparative Economics上发表。本次王璐航发表在《美国经济评论》的论文利用中国加入WTO带来的关税变化研究中国最终产品以及中间投入品的市场开放对于制造业绩效的影响。研究发现最终产品关税的降低一方面压缩了大企业的价格加成,另一方面推动了行业生产效率的提高。与其他国家的经验不同,中国行业效率提升的主要原因是竞争机制的强化进而筛选出了更好的新企业进入。伴随着中间品关税的降低,中国的中间品进口增长有限,但是中间品价格大幅下降。得益于由此带来的成本降低,企业提高了加成率。中间品市场的变化也对新进入企业的生产效率有正的贡献。该文也是厦大经济学科“海归”教师在国际顶级期刊发表研究中国经济问题的众多学术论文的一个典型代表。

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors link the sharp drop in US manufacturing employment after 2000 to a change in US trade policy that eliminated potential tariff increases on Chinese imports, and show that industries more exposed to the change experience greater employment loss, increased imports from China, and higher entry by US importers and foreign-owned Chinese exporters.
Abstract: This paper links the sharp drop in US manufacturing employment after 2000 to a change in US trade policy that eliminated potential tariff increases on Chinese imports. Industries more exposed to the change experience greater employment loss, increased imports from China, and higher entry by US importers and foreign-owned Chinese exporters. At the plant level, shifts toward less labor-intensive production and exposure to the policy via input-output linkages also contribute to the decline in employment. Results are robust to other potential explanations of employment loss, and there is no similar reaction in the European Union, where policy did not change. (JEL D72, E24, F13, F16, L24, L60, P33)

562 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Wang et al. as discussed by the authors found that substitution of domestic for imported materials by individual processing exporters caused China's domestic content in exports to increase from 65 to 70 percent in 2000-2007.
Abstract: China has defied the declining trend in domestic content in exports in many countries. This paper studies China’s rising domestic content in exports using firm- and customs transaction-level data. The approach embraces firm heterogeneity and hence reduces aggregation bias. The study finds that the substitution of domestic for imported materials by individual processing exporters caused China’s domestic content in exports to increase from 65 to 70 percent in 2000–2007. Such substitution was induced by the country’s trade and investment liberalization, which deepened its engagement in global value chains and led to a greater variety of domestic materials becoming available at lower prices.

361 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors estimate the impact of environmental regulation on firm exports by combining time variations, cross-province variations in policy intensity, and variations in pollution intensity across industries.

301 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article found that the transformation of firms that remained under state control and the creation of new state-controlled firms together account for 21 percent of China's growth from 1998 to 2007 and 18 percent of its growth from 2007 to 2012.
Abstract: In the late 1990s, China’s industrial sector was dominated by state-owned firms. We document how this changed after 1998. More than 80 percent of the state-owned firms in 1998 were shut down or privatized by 2007. Among firms we classify as state-controlled in 2007, many were restructured and registered as private firms with a controlling share held by a state-owned conglomerate or were new firms established after 1998. In 2007, almost half of the state-controlled firms were registered as private firms, and about 40 percent were new firms established after 1998. The privatization and convergence in labor productivity decelerated after 2007, but the establishment of new state-owned firms continued at roughly the same rate. When we interpret these facts through the lens of an equilibrium model of heterogeneous firms, we find that the transformation of firms that remained under state control and the creation of new state-controlled firms together account for 21 percent of China’s growth from 1998 to 2007 and 18 percent of its growth from 2007 to 2012. However, the exit and privatization of state-owned firms had a negligible effect on aggregate growth.

298 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors empirically investigate whether trade liberalization affects markup dispersion, a potential source of resource misallocation, using China's WTO accession at the end of 2001.
Abstract: In this paper, we empirically investigate whether trade liberalization affects markup dispersion, a potential source of resource misallocation. The identification uses China's WTO accession at the end of 2001. We show that trade liberalization reduces markup dispersion within a narrowly defined industry. We also examine both price and cost responses to trade liberalization, as well as heterogeneous effects across firms and across locations. Our study contributes to the literature by identifying another potential channel through which free trade benefits a nation. (JEL F13, L11, O14, O19, P23, P31, P33)

202 citations


Cites background or methods or result from "WTO Accession and Performance of Ch..."

  • ...This is the most comprehensive and representative rm-level dataset in China, and surveyed rms contribute the majority of China s industrial value-added....

    [...]

  • ...Accordingly, it has been widely used by economic researchers in recent years, e.g., Lu, Lu, and Tao (2010), Brandt, Van Biesebroeck and Zhang (2012), Brandt et al. (2012)....

    [...]

  • ...These results suggest that two di¤erences both play an important role in generating di¤erent ndings between ours and Brandt et al. (2012) s. 22 we control for productivity dispersion in the regression of markup dispersion on trade liberalization to partially isolate the price-change channel of the…...

    [...]

  • ...First, we use mean markups from Brandt et al. (2012) s production function estimation in our regression speci cation, and also nd a negative but insign cant e¤ect (i.e., the coe¢ cient is 0:042 with a standard error of 0:076)....

    [...]

  • ...Second, we use our estimated mean markups in Brandt et al. (2012) s regession speci cation, and also nd a negative but insigni cant e¤ect (i.e., the coe¢ cient for one-year change is 0:057 with a standard error of 0:048)....

    [...]

References
More filters
Book
01 Jan 1990
TL;DR: The Need for a New Paradigm as discussed by the authors is the need for a new paradigm for the competitive advantage of companies in global industries, as well as the dynamics of national competitive advantage.
Abstract: The Need for a New Paradigm - PART I: FOUNDATIONS - The Competitive Advantage of Firms in Global Industries - Determinants of National Competitive Advantage - The Dynamics of National Advantage - PART II: INDUSTRIES - Four Studies in National Competitive Advantage - National Competitive Advantage in Services - PART III: NATIONS - Patterns of National Competitive Advantage: The Early Postwar Winners - Emerging Nations in the 1970s and 1980s - Shifting National Advantage - The Competitive Development of National Economies - PART IV: IMPLICATIONS - Company Strategy - Government Policy - National Agendas - Epilogue - Appendices - References

22,660 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper developed a dynamic industry model with heterogeneous firms to analyze the intra-industry effects of international trade and showed how the exposure to trade will induce only the more productive firms to enter the export market (while some less productive firms continue to produce only for the domestic market).
Abstract: This paper develops a dynamic industry model with heterogeneous firms to analyze the intra-industry effects of international trade. The model shows how the exposure to trade will induce only the more productive firms to enter the export market (while some less productive firms continue to produce only for the domestic market) and will simultaneously force the least productive firms to exit. It then shows how further increases in the industry's exposure to trade lead to additional inter-firm reallocations towards more productive firms. The paper also shows how the aggregate industry productivity growth generated by the reallocations contributes to a welfare gain, thus highlighting a benefit from trade that has not been examined theoretically before. The paper adapts Hopenhayn's (1992a) dynamic industry model to monopolistic competition in a general equilibrium setting. In so doing, the paper provides an extension of Krugman's (1980) trade model that incorporates firm level productivity differences. Firms with different productivity levels coexist in an industry because each firm faces initial uncertainty concerning its productivity before making an irreversible investment to enter the industry. Entry into the export market is also costly, but the firm's decision to export occurs after it gains knowledge of its productivity.

9,036 citations

Posted Content
TL;DR: In this paper, a dynamic industry model with heterogeneous firms is proposed to explain why international trade induces reallocations of resources among firms in an industry and contributes to a welfare gain.
Abstract: This Paper builds a dynamic industry model with heterogeneous firms that explains why international trade induces reallocations of resources among firms in an industry. The Paper shows how the exposure to trade will induce only the more productive firms to enter the export market (while some less productive firms continue to produce only for the domestic market) and will simultaneously force the least productive firms to exit. It then shows how further increases in the industry's exposure to trade lead to additional inter-firm reallocations towards more productive firms. These phenomena have been empirically documented but cannot be explained by current general equilibrium trade models, because they rely on a representative firm framework. The Paper also shows how the aggregate industry productivity growth generated by the reallocations contributes to a welfare gain, thus highlighting a benefit from trade that has not been examined theoretically before. The Paper adapts Hopenhayn's (1992a) dynamic industry model to monopolistic competition in a general equilibrium setting. In so doing, the Paper provides an extension of Krugman's (1980) trade model that incorporates firm level productivity differences. Firms with different productivity levels coexist in an industry because each firm faces initial uncertainty concerning its productivity before making an irreversible investment to enter the industry. Entry into the export market is also costly, but the firm's decision to export occurs after it gains knowledge of its productivity.

5,186 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that the conflict between capitalism and socialism is not necessarily in competition or conflict with each other, at least not conceptually (whether they could in practice coexist with one another is a different and empirical question).
Abstract: C A P I T A L IS M and socialism are generally taken to be irreconcilable opposites, and the conflict between their adherents has seemed so intense as to threaten the survival of the human species. In practice, no doubt, all sorts of compromises, accommodations and mixtures of the two are possible, but conceptually, considered as blueprints for the organization of society, capitalist and socialist ownership of the means of production appear mutually exclysive. I shall argue that this is by no means the case-that capitalism and socialism are, in fact, conceptually quite compatible; that a society be at the same time capitalist and socialist (by that I do not refer to a 'mixed economy') involves no contradiction. For it turns out, on closer examination than the matter usually receives, that capitalism and socialism are features of different parts of the social structure, and are therefore not necessarily in competition or conflict with one another-at least, not conceptually (whether they could in practice coexist with one another is a different and empirical question, which is raised by, for example, 'functionalist' theories of social structure'). In brief, while capitalism is a feature of society's economic organization, socialism is rather an aspect of its political system. In fact, as we shall see, socialism is a part of political democracy, and any democratic political system is therefore necessarily socialist.

5,034 citations