We present the first comprehensive set of firm-level total factor productivity estimates for China's manufacturing sector that spans her entry into WTO. We find that productivity growth is among the highest compared to other countries. For our preferred estimate, the weighted average annual productivity growth for incumbents is 2.7% for a gross output production function and 7.7% for a value added production function over the period [1998][1999][2000][2001][2002][2003][2004][2005][2006]. Of the various sensitivity checks we carry out, controlling for the increase in labor quality and labor hours, as proxied by the rising real wage, has the largest (downward) effect on the productivity estimates. We further document that new entrants are a particularly dynamic force and that firms experience large productivity declines before exiting from the sample. Overall, net entry contributes roughly half to total TFP growth. Aggregate productivity growth, however, is tempered by a much lower effect of reallocation of inputs towards higher productivity firms, compared to the U.S. benchmark.

We examine the effects of trade liberalization in China on the evolution of markups and productivity of manufacturing firms. Although these dimensions of performance cannot be separately identified when firm output is measured by revenue, detailed price deflators make it possible to estimate the average effect of tariff reductions on both. Several novel findings emerge. First, cuts in output tariffs reduce markups, but raise productivity. Second, pro-competitive effects are most important among incumbents, while efficiency gains dominate for new entrants. Third, cuts in input tariffs raise both markups and productivity. We highlight mechanisms that explain these findings in the Chinese context. (JEL D24, F13, L25, L60, O14, P31, P33)

We present the first comprehensive set of firm-level total factor productivity estimates for China's manufacturing sector that spans her entry into WTO. We find that productivity growth is among the highest compared to other countries. For our preferred estimate, the weighted average annual productivity growth for incumbents is 2.7% for a gross output production function and 7.7% for a value added production function over the period [1998][1999][2000][2001][2002][2003][2004][2005][2006]. Of the various sensitivity checks we carry out, controlling for the increase in labor quality and labor hours, as proxied by the rising real wage, has the largest (downward) effect on the productivity estimates. We further document that new entrants are a particularly dynamic force and that firms experience large productivity declines before exiting from the sample. Overall, net entry contributes roughly half to total TFP growth. Aggregate productivity growth, however, is tempered by a much lower effect of reallocation of inputs towards higher productivity firms, compared to the U.S. benchmark.

Qinghua (2017) Roads, railroads and decentralization of Chinese cities. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 99 (3). pp. 435-448.

We study bank discrimination against private firms in transition countries. Theoretically, we show that banks may discriminate for non-profit reasons, but this discrimination diminishes with a bank's incentives and human capital. Employing matching bank-firm data from China, we empirically examine the extent, sources and consequences of discrimination. Our unique survey design allows us to disentangle sample truncation, omitted variable bias, and endogeneity issues. Our empirical findings confirm the theoretical predictions. We also find that as a result of discrimination, private firmsresorttomoreexpensivetradecredits.

Prices differ across space: from province to province, from rural (or urban) areas in one province to rural (or urban) areas in another province, and from rural to urban areas within one province. Systematic differences in prices across a range of goods and services in different localities imply regional differences in the costs of living. If high-income provinces also have high costs of living, and low-income provinces have low costs of living, the use of nominal income measures in explaining such economic outcomes as inequality can lead to misinterpretations. Income should be adjusted for costs of living. We are interested in the sign and magnitude of the adjustments needed, their changes over time, and their impact on economic outcomes in China. In this article, we construct a set of (rural, urban, total) provincial-level spatial price deflators for the years 1984-2002 that can be used to obtain provincial-level income measures adjusted for purchasing power. We provide illustrations of the significant effect of ignoring spatial price differences in the analysis of China's economy. This is the Pre-Published Version 1 Spatial Price Differences in China: Estimates and Implications IntroductionPrice indices are standard statistical data that are constructed by statistical authorities across all countries. The key price index often is the Consumer Price Index (CPI). In the U.S., for example, the CPI serves as an economic indicator used in formulating fiscal and monetary policy, as a deflator of other economic series (for example, retail sales, or hourly and weekly earnings), and as a means of adjusting dollar values (for example, when social security benefits are indexed using the CPI). 1 But while the calculation and use of price indices are widespread, absolute price comparisons across localities are usually not po ssible. Thus, in the U.S., the Bureau of Labor Statistics compiles a nationwide urban CPI based on about 80,000prices recorded in 87 urban areas by aggregating individual commodity or area indices. 2 The commodities are specific to the local outlets; no data are collected on the price of one specific commodity in different areas of the U.S. A comparison of the absolute price level in one locality with that in another locality, thus, is not possible for the U.S.China's National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), like the Bureau of Labor Statistics in the U.S., publishes a number of official price indices, including national and provincial CPIs, as well as separate CPIs for rural and urban areas at both the national and the provincial level.These price indices allow a comparison of the changes in the level of consumer prices over time across different localities, but do not permit a comparison of absolute price levels between different localities at a given point in time. Like the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the NBS does not publish data on the individual prices and quantities underlying the provincial price indices it constructs.The ability to compare the absolute price level across localities at a point i...

In this paper we measure the distortions in the allocation of labor and capital across provinces and sectors in China for the period 1985-2007. Most existing studies have measured factor market distortions by using some index of dispersion in individual factor returns. However, the map between these dispersion measures and the efficiency loss due to distortions is not clear, especially when there is more than one factor. In this paper, we follow Hsieh and Klenow (2009)'s strategy by measuring the factor market distortions as the reduction in aggregate TFP due to distortions. We extend their analysis by decomposing the overall distortions into between-province and within-province inter-sectoral distortions. We find: (1) For the period between 1985 and 2007, the distortions in factor allocation reduced aggregate TFP by about 31% on average, with the within-province distortions accounting for more than half of the reduction; (2) the measure of between-province distortions was relatively constant over the period; (3) the measure of within-province distortions declined between 1985 and 1997, contributing to 0.96% TFP growth per year, but then increased significantly in the last ten years, reducing the aggregate TFP growth rate by 1.41% a year; and (4) almost all of the within-province distortions can be accounted for by the misallocation of capital between the state and the non-state sectors.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Economic Development and Cultural Change.