1 / 17

Job creation, job destruction and firm-level international trade involvement

Job creation, job destruction and firm-level international trade involvement. Mauro Pisu. Research Department:. Introduction. How the globalisation process may affect employment growth job reallocation Possible to investigate these issues using firm-level data Advantage:

aerona
Télécharger la présentation

Job creation, job destruction and firm-level international trade involvement

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Job creation, job destruction and firm-level international trade involvement • Mauro Pisu Research Department:

  2. Introduction • How the globalisation process may affect • employment growth • job reallocation • Possible to investigate these issues using firm-level data • Advantage: • micro explanations of macro phenomena • analysis of topics macro data cannot deal with (e.g.: job creation and destruction) • Firm-level data evidence are important since: • academic literature has shown that firms are greatly heterogeneous • net changes in employment at country- or industry-level result from expansion of some firms and contraction in others • there is contemporaneous job creation and destruction

  3. Heterogeneous firms trade theory • Main features: Melitz (2003), Bernard, Redding, Schott (2007) • Heterogeneous firms (in productivity levels) • Sunk and variable costs • Results: • Only the most productive firms self-select into export markets • Trade causes reallocation of jobs from non exporting to exporting firms • Simultaneous job creation and destruction (Davis and Haltiwanger 1992) within industry because of international trade • Models have been extended to FDI and imports decisions

  4. Belgian firm-level data • Merging of three data sets from the NBB: • Annual accounts of Belgian companies (Central Balance Sheet Office): information on the number of employees in FTE • External trade statistics (Intra- and Extrastat inquiries) • Survey on foreign direct investment (balance of payments statistics) • Time span: 1997 - 2004 • Population in 2004: • 136,945 firms1 that reported at least one employee (1,827,786 workers in FTE), of which: • 2,643 firms involved in direct investment relations (either as direct investor or as direct investment company or both at the same time) • 26,744 firms involved in external trade • Not entirely comparable with the population considered in the national accounts 1 Out of 309,486 firms that filed a balance sheet in 2004.

  5. Distribution by type of firm in 2004 (percentages of the total) Total Manufacturing Wholesale and retail Services 2% 4% 1% 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% 8% 14% 7% 4% 21% Shares in the number of firms 14% 79% 59% 65% 87% 8% 6% 7% 3% 35% 11% 26% 50% 4% 27% 43% 24% 21% 8% 15% Shares in employment 28% 6% 11% 12% 24% 6% 16% 3% 8% 11% 6% 2% Source: NBB.

  6. Sectoral distribution of the external trade (percentages of the total for the whole population) Source: NBB. 1 Exports and imports of goods only.

  7. Contribution to net changes in employment (manufacturing and services, selected industries, percentage changes between 1997 and 2004) Source: NBB. Note: only those industries that account for 2 p.c. or more of total employment are represented here.

  8. Job creation and destruction (Cumulated annual changes in the number of jobs: 1997 - 2004) • Net changes in employment hide a great deal of the contemporaneous job creation and destruction • These figures imply that on average 224,491 jobs were created or destroyed each year in these two broad sectors Source: NBB.

  9. Share of jobs created and destroyed due to entries and exits, 1997-2004 Source: NBB. Note: These graphs show the percentage of the jobs created and destroyed by each type of firms due to entries and exits, respectively.

  10. Job creation and destruction rates across trading status (contemporaneous creation and destruction rates; Davis and Haltiwanger (1992) methodology) NT: Non-traders, EXP: Exporters, IMP: Importers, TWT: Two-way traders, FOR: Foreign affiliates, MNE: Belgian Multinationals. Source: NBB Note: 1 p.c. = 0.01

  11. Regression results (OLS estimates ; coefficients in percentage point) Source: NBB. n.s.s. = not statistically significant. Notes: Specification is gijt = α + βTSijt + δSijt + ηPijt + σPRijt + ID + YD + εit, where gijt = employment growth rate of firm i in industry j at time t; TSijt = trading status; Sijt = size; Pijt = productivity; PRijt = profitability; ID= industry (four digits); YD = time. Time and industry dummies not reported.

  12. Regression results, without entries and exits (OLS estimates ; coefficients in percentage) Source: NBB. n.s.s. = not statistically significant. Notes: Specification is gijt = α + βTSijt + δSijt + ηPijt + σPRijt + ID + YD + εit, where gijt = employment growth rate of firm i in industry j at time t; TSijt = trading status; Sijt = size; Pijt = productivity; PRijt = profitability; ID= industry (four digits); YD = time. Time and industry dummies not reported.

  13. Regression results for wholesale and retail and others services (OLS estimates ; coefficients in percentage) Source: NBB. n.s.s. = not statistically significant. Notes: Specification is gijt = α + βTSijt + δSijt + ηPijt + σPRijt + ID + YD + εit, where gijt = employment growth rate of firm i in industry j at time t; TSijt = trading status; Sijt = size; Pijt = productivity; PRijt = profitability; ID= industry (four digits); YD = time. Time and industry dummies not reported.

  14. International trade and job reallocation • Issue: effect of firm-level parcitipation in int. markets on job reallocation: shifts of jobs from non-trading to trading firms • Methodology of Davis and Haltiwanger (1992) applied to trading and non trading firms (within sectors) • Excess job reallocation: • s are different types of firms (trading and non-trading firms) • If between component high and within component low • then firm-level trade is an important cause of job reallocation (consistent with theoretical models)

  15. Between share of excess job reallocation(average of three-digit industry level figures) Source: NBB. Notes: Yearly figures are weighted averages of the between shares computed for each three-digit Nace sector; the weights used are the number of firms in each three-digit industry-year cell; a figures computed considering only surviving firms (i.e. dropping entries and exits); b figures computed allocating births and deaths to specific types of firms according to their trading status the year they entered and the year before they exited.

  16. Summary and conclusions (1/2) • Firm level data allow to study how international involvement affects the process of job creation and destruction rates, not only net changes • Belgian data: controlling for other factors, international trade involvement is associated with: • higher net employment growth rates • lower job creation and destruction rates •  Workers face a lower uncertainty in trading firms

  17. Summary and conclusions (2/2) • Job reallocation rates (Davis and Haltiwanger 1992) between trading and nontrading firms are relatively low • 15-25 percent at three-digit level • All types of firms (traders, non-traders, MNEs and foreign affiliates) create and destroy jobs • participation in international markets is not the only explanation of job creation and destruction process • Open questions: • impact of international trade involvement on workers having different skills • how international trade compares with other shocks

More Related