文献研读1(12):Creative accounting or creative destruction? Firm-level productivi

相似文件 换一批

是 否 +2 论坛币

k人 参与回答

经管之家送您一份

应届毕业生专属福利!

求职就业群

赵安豆老师微信：zhaoandou666

经管之家联合CDA

送您一个全额奖学金名额~ !

立即领取

感谢您参与论坛问题回答

经管之家送您两个论坛币！

+2 论坛币

第一个专题：经济增长
第12篇文献：Brandt Loren,Biesebroeck Johannes Van, and Zhang Yifan. Creative accounting or creativedestruction? Firm-level productivity growth in China. Journal of DevelopmentEconomics, 2012, 97, 339-351.


掀起讨论，朋友们。。。

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明：姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格，未注明则拒绝

分享0 收藏10 回帖

关键词：Destruction Accounting Creative counting Account accounting Johannes Journal Brandt growth

占位，更新。

看点：
1. 文章使用1998-2007企业数据，分析中国制造业的生产率。
2. 有很多数据处理的技巧：比如不同代码的衔接、通胀的处理等。
3. 文章从生产率的提高、企业进入和退出、企业间要素分配三个角度阐述了生产率的变量和分解情况。

文章工作量大，引用了大量的文献用于比较分析，可谓鸿篇巨制。

结论

(1) Drawing on anunbalanced panel of firms between 1998 and 2007, we find firm-level TFP growthof manufacturing firms averaging 2.85% for a gross output production functionand 7.96% for a value added production function.

(2) Over the fullsample period, our results identify net entry as thesource of more than two thirds of total productivity growth.

In all, wefind that TFP growth coming from improvements in continuing firms (theintensive margin of TFP growth) and through net entry (the extensive margin ofTFP growth) was the source ofover half of value added growth inmanufacturing over the 1998-2007 period. TFP’s contribution to labor productivity growth is even higher attwo-thirds. Aggregate TFPgrowth in Chinese manufacturing remains constrained by limited efficiency-enhancinginput reallocations between active firms, confirming results in Hsieh and Klenow(2009).

政策启发

As inputgrowth slows and the technology gap with advanced countries narrows, furtherreforms to enhance efficient allocation of resources still provide importantgrowth potential. A policy ofliberalizing entry and facilitating exit has already played an important role in thisregard. Removal of constraints that underpin productivity differences amongexisting firms, including those between the state and non-state sectors willhave to be tackled next.

估计方法

(1)Benchmark measurement： 增长核算

(2)稳健性检验：Olley andPakes (1996)和Ackerberg etal. (2006)

Data

(1) 处理的三大问题

Industryconcordances, deflators for all nominal variables, programs to match firms overtime, and to construct a real capital stock series. 此外，对劳动份额的处理。We followHsieh and Klenow (2009) and inflate wage payments by a constant factor for allfirms to work with a wage share consistent with the national average (55%).

(2)数据跟踪

One-sixth ofthe Chinese firms in our sample have at least one ID change.

We use uniquenumerical IDs to link firms over time. We have aimed to track firms as theirboundaries or ownership structure changes, using information on the firm’sname, industry, address, etc., to link them.

(3)数据信息

There are148685 firms in 1998 and 313048 in 2007. On average, the annual rate ofattrition in our sample is slightly less than 14%. Out of our original samplein 1998 of 148685 firms, 33045 firms or just under a quarter, survive through2007. Exit was more than offset by entry, which averaged nearly 20% per annum.

4 results

分析框架

Aggregate TFPgrowth for the manufacturing sector can occur in three important ways:

(1)through firm-level productivity growth.

(2) exit of below-average productivityfirms or entry of above-average firms.

(3) the reallocation of productionfactors from less to more productive continuing firms.

4.2 Firm-levelproductivity growth

4.3 Enteringand exiting firms

It is alsoimportant (1) where in the distribution the new firms are entering and wherethe old ones are disappearing, and (2) how productivity growth evolves over afirm’s life cycle.

4.4 Resourcereallocation between active firms

We do this byapplying the methodology that Bartelsman andDhrymes (1998) used for U.S.plants to the Chinese firms in our data set.

4.5 From themicro to the macro level

4.5.1 Growthdecomposition

4.5.2 Stateversus non-state

4.5.3 Sectoralheterogeneity

最后一部分只列框架，公式自己到文章中看。

加油，继续

评议
1.中国资本要素等的价格是便宜的，尤其是劳动力、土地和资本的价格严重走低。同时，大企业是垄断的，比如金融、石化、电力、电信等，作者高估了生产率。

2. 这里的生产率是什么？是扣除要素投入部分的剩余。这需要辩证地看待。
Barro（1997）认为Dy=f(y, y*)。即与初始条件和稳态有关。中国经济发展水平较低，距离稳态远，所以经济增长快；同时，战后和平的外部环境、改革开放、地方ZF驱动使得稳态提高，所以经济增长快。见第7篇文献https://bbs.pinggu.org/thread-2899496-1-1.html
透过Barro的解释，TFP的增加有两个渠道：一是经济发展初始条件较低，距离稳态较远；第二稳态提高。稳态提高最重要的渠道是制度创新和技术创新。TFP增加了，可能由第一条渠道导致，也可能由第二条渠道导致，我们无从区辨。建立在TFP增加，得出经济增长可持续的结论是值得商榷的。从这个意义上说，我们应该告别TFP的神话（Say goodby to the myth of TFP），区分到底是什么渠道导致了TFP增长。

一句话总结，TFP中有多少是由技术进步和技术创新导致的？这才是问题的关键。

3.文章对TFP的计算高估，但是作者将时间段分为2001前和2001年后，识别TFP的变化，是有道理的。通过TFP的变化，可能断定制度创新的作用力。

4.作者对问题分析的认真，分析问题的多条维度，都是值得学习的。

再讨论：
废了老大功夫，得出的结论是值得商榷的。我们应该反思什么？

一笑而过。。。。。

谢谢分享

天涯牧歌220 发表于 2015-8-9 21:14
谢谢分享

谢谢分享

不错的。。。。

请问，可以分享一份完整的Brandt（2012）的code吗？万分感谢！！我的邮箱lnn_kaka8@163.com

请问，可以分享一份完整的Brandt（2012）的code吗？万分感谢！！我的邮箱2967481436@qq.com