Evaluating the Contribution of Exporting to UK Productivity Growth: Some Microeconomic Evidence

Harris, Richard; Li, Qian Cher

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9701.2007.01087.x

Cited by 27 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some works distinguish export experience from export participation by referring to the idea of learning-by-doing, where learning experience reduces production costs. 2 Aw et al (2000) provide evidence of learning-by-exporting in Korea, Castellani (2002) for Italy, Fafchamps et al (2002) for Morocco, Baldwin and Gu (2004) for Canada, Bigsten et al (2004) for four African countries, Blalock and Gertler (2004) for Indonesia, Girma et al (2004) for the U.K., Alvarez and López (2005) for Chile, Fernandes and Isgut (2005) for Columbia, Van Biesebroeck (2005) for nine African countries, Crespi et al (2008) for the U.K., Harris and Li (2008) for the U.K., and Trofimenko (2008) for Columbia. Other recent works find that industry characteristics are important factors in determining learning-by-doing (Greenaway and Kneller 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Extending the Learning-By-Exporting Hypothesis: Introducing a Credit Constraint

Yokota¹,

Tomohara

2009

Int Adv Econ Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Extending the Learning-By-Exporting Hypothesis: Introducing a Credit Constraint

Yokota¹,

Tomohara

2009

Int Adv Econ Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Selling goods abroad by the firms carry extra costs (sunk costs) e.g., collection of information related to the demands of international customers, transportation costs, distribution or marketing costs and the costs of managing foreign networks (Haidar, 2012;Harris and Li, 2008). To cover sunk costs, exporting firms' require prior high productivity.…”

Section: Self-selection (Ss) Hypothesismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular, international markets select the most productive and innovative firms. Several studies (e.g., Masso and Vahter, 2011;Lopez, 2009;Claudio, Jose and Alvaro, 2014;Harris and Li, 2008;Manez-Castillejo et al 2009) have estimated the link between innovation, productivity and exporting. They categorized their relationship into two major hypotheses.…”

Section: Related Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Self-selection and learning-by-exporting hypotheses: micro-level evidence

Rehman

2017

Eurasian Econ Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This aim of this empirical paper is to investigate the self-selection and learning-by-exporting hypotheses. This study addresses the reverse causality between innovation, productivity and exporting using micro level data on 29 countries from Eurasia and Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). CDM estimation results suggest that innovation and productivity positively influence the firm's exporting and vice versa. This study has supported the self-selection and learning-by-exporting hypotheses. Previous studies provided mixed outcome on the analysis of these two major hypotheses. Similarly, innovation by exporting is examined using multiple proxies of innovation such as product/process innovation, R&D and organizational innovation. Findings imply that innovation is an important determinant of firms' exporting and this outcome is robust across Eurasian and CEE firms. Moreover, foreign owned firms are more likely to export and innovate than domestic firms due to their technological superiority over domestic firms. Concerning policy implications, economic policies should address the firm's innovation, productivity and exporting performance. This would result in better economic integration between Eurasian and CEE firms. By removing the firm's barriers such as access to finance, trade regulations and taxation etc would encourage trade networks between Eurasian and CEE firms.

show abstract

“…New providers that enter the market may offer a different, innovative service or provide a service that better meets particular needs. Competition from new entrants can also act as an incentive for existing providers to drive up the quality of their service or face exit (Harris and Li, 2008;Bloom and Van Reenen, 2010).…”

Section: Promoting Healthy Competition Between Providersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public service markets: their economics, institutional oversight and regulation

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public services in the United Kingdom have been transformed over the past 25 years with the introduction of market-oriented solutions into their provision. This has been characterized by a shift away from state provision to independent providers, and by the introduction of competition and choice. This shift was partly ideologically motivated and partly driven by budget-cutting considerations following the global financial crisis. As such, it has been lacking a comprehensive economic justification or method of analysis. It is now commonly accepted that the language of economic markets is essential to frame arguments about how effectively public services are achieving their intended outcomes. Using market language and concepts may not always be comfortable for those from a traditional policymaking background. It can nevertheless be very useful when designing investigations into the effectiveness and value for money in the mechanisms of delivery of such services, whenever these services entail a degree of user choice as is currently the case in large parts of health care, social care and education (referred to as competition in the market). This article aims to provide a conceptual basis on the way of thinking in these terms. We provide a description of the current state and then comment on the desirability of this quasi-market approach. Uniquely in the literature, we analyse the expected and desired developments by distinguishing between choice and compulsory merit goods. In choice merit goods markets many users are unable to choose effectively because of the existence of a number of demand-side or supply-side market failures. Moreover, conflicts may exist between how service users actually make choices, and policy objectives such as universality or equity, which may not be achieved simply by "leaving it to the market". The users of compulsory merit goods are typically a minority and unable to internalize the full social benefits of their actions; hence, it may be welfare-enhancing for society to coerce them to "consume" these services. As choice cannot be an objective, the commissioning (competition for the market) or direct provision by the state of such goods may meet public policy objectives more effectively than the market mechanism alone. Building on these foundations, this article discusses when public service markets (PSMs) are likely to be an effective method of achieving public policy objectives, and when they may not be. We analyse the implications for the institutional and legal framework, funding oversight and regulation of PSMs as a result of their transformation into quasi-markets. We conclude with some suggestions for those charged with overseeing PSMs in practice based on this analysis.

show abstract

Evaluating the Contribution of Exporting to UK Productivity Growth: Some Microeconomic Evidence

Cited by 27 publications

References 57 publications

Extending the Learning-By-Exporting Hypothesis: Introducing a Credit Constraint

Extending the Learning-By-Exporting Hypothesis: Introducing a Credit Constraint

Self-selection and learning-by-exporting hypotheses: micro-level evidence

Public service markets: their economics, institutional oversight and regulation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About