High-growth firms' contribution to aggregate productivity growth

被引:9
作者
Bisztray, Marta [1 ,2 ]
de Nicola, Francesca [3 ]
Murakozy, Balazs [4 ,5 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Ctr Econ & Reg Studies KRTK, Budapest, Hungary
[2] Corvinus Univ Budapest, CERGE EI Fdn, Budapest, Hungary
[3] World Bank, 1818 H St NW, Washington, DC 20433 USA
[4] Univ Liverpool, Management Sch, Liverpool, Merseyside, England
[5] KRTK, Budapest, Hungary
[6] Chatham St, Liverpool L69 7ZH, Merseyside, England
关键词
High-growth firms; Productivity growth; Reallocation; Industry dynamic; Productivity decomposition; L25; O40; POLICY; SURVIVAL; TURNOVER; CHINA; AGE;
D O I
10.1007/s11187-022-00614-9
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
This paper investigates the contribution of high-growth firms (HGFs) to aggregate productivity growth, using Hungarian firm-level data. Three stylized facts emerge. First, output-based HGFs substantially outperform employment-based ones in terms of their productivity contribution: on average, sales-based HGFs contribute 5 times as much as employment-based ones. Further, the contribution of employment-based HGFs is negative in 48-50% of industry-years, compared to 25-31% for sales-based HGFs. Second, HGFs tend to contribute to productivity growth only during their high-growth phase but not afterwards. Third, HGFs' contribution to productivity growth is higher in industries with more effective reallocation and with more young firms, but none of these are strong predictors of the HGFs' contribution. Finally, we present a simple benchmark model to show that these patterns arise naturally under realistic correlation structures. Plain English Summary Firms that increase their sales quickly are responsible for a large part of industry-level productivity growth, but only during their high-growth phase. In contrast, firms that increase their employment quickly often experience falling productivity. This paper quantifies the contribution of high-growth firms (HGFs) to industry-level productivity growth, using Hungarian data. We find that i) the contribution depends strongly on the way growth is measured: firms growing in terms of revenue tend to contribute more than firms growing in terms of employment, ii) HGFs contribute to productivity growth mainly through their high-growth period, but not afterwards, iii) these contributions are not strongly associated with industry characteristics, though they tend to be larger in industries with more young firms. Our results are relevant for policymakers who are interested in the productivity effects of HGFs not only job creation, and suggest that expected productivity effects i) depend on the type of high growth, ii) are concentrated to the high-growth period, and iii) might not be enhanced by industry targeting.
引用
收藏
页码:771 / 811
页数:41
相关论文
共 64 条
  • [1] IDENTIFICATION PROPERTIES OF RECENT PRODUCTION FUNCTION ESTIMATORS
    Ackerberg, Daniel A.
    Caves, Kevin
    Frazer, Garth
    [J]. ECONOMETRICA, 2015, 83 (06) : 2411 - 2451
  • [2] Acs Z, 2009, SBA REPORTS
  • [3] Andrews D, 2015, RBA ANN C VOL RES BA
  • [4] Andrews D., 2016, OECD PRODUCTIVITY WO, V5, DOI [10.1787/63629cc9-en, DOI 10.1787/63629CC9-EN]
  • [5] A Balls-and-Bins Model of Trade
    Armenter, Roc
    Koren, Miklos
    [J]. AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2014, 104 (07) : 2127 - 2151
  • [6] Assessing the Determinants of High-Growth Manufacturing Firms in Italy
    Arrighetti, Alessandro
    Lasagni, Andrea
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE ECONOMICS OF BUSINESS, 2013, 20 (02) : 245 - 267
  • [7] Retaining winners: Can policy boost high-growth entrepreneurship?
    Autio, Erkko
    Rannikko, Heikki
    [J]. RESEARCH POLICY, 2016, 45 (01) : 42 - 55
  • [8] Balsvik R, 2006, CONTRIBUTION FOREIGN
  • [9] PRODUCTIVITY AND MISALLOCATION IN GENERAL EQUILIBRIUM
    Baqaee, David Rezza
    Farhi, Emmanuel
    [J]. QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 2020, 135 (01) : 105 - 163
  • [10] Cross-Country Differences in Productivity: The Role of Allocation and Selection
    Bartelsman, Eric
    Haltiwanger, John
    Scarpetta, Stefano
    [J]. AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2013, 103 (01) : 305 - 334