IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/emetrp/v83y2015ip2411-2451.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Identification Properties of Recent Production Function Estimators

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel A. Ackerberg
  • Kevin Caves
  • Garth Frazer

Abstract

This paper examines some of the recent literature on the estimation of production functions. We focus on techniques suggested in two recent papers, Olley and Pakes (1996) and Levinsohn and Petrin (2003). While there are some solid and intuitive identification ideas in these papers, we argue that the techniques can suffer from functional dependence problems. We suggest an alternative approach that is based on the ideas in these papers, but does not suffer from the functional dependence problems and produces consistent estimates under alternative data generating processes for which the original procedures do not.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel A. Ackerberg & Kevin Caves & Garth Frazer, 2015. "Identification Properties of Recent Production Function Estimators," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 2411-2451, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:emetrp:v:83:y:2015:i::p:2411-2451
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yair Mundlak, 1961. "Empirical Production Function Free of Management Bias," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 43(1), pages 44-56.
    2. Jan De Loecker & Frederic Warzynski, 2012. "Markups and Firm-Level Export Status," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(6), pages 2437-2471, October.
    3. Panzar, John C., 1989. "Technological determinants of firm and industry structure," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 1, pages 3-59, Elsevier.
    4. Fuss, Melvyn & McFadden, Daniel (ed.), 1978. "Production Economics: A Dual Approach to Theory and Applications," Elsevier Monographs, Elsevier, edition 1, number 9780444850133.
    5. Johannes Van Biesebroeck, 2007. "Robustness Of Productivity Estimates," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(3), pages 529-569, September.
    6. Bruno, Michael, 1978. "Duality, Intermediate Inputs and Value-Added," Histoy of Economic Thought Chapters, in: Fuss, Melvyn & McFadden, Daniel (ed.),Production Economics: A Dual Approach to Theory and Applications, volume 2, chapter 1, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought.
    7. Diewert, W. Erwin, 1978. "Hick's Aggregation Theorem and the Existence of a Real Value Added Function," Histoy of Economic Thought Chapters, in: Fuss, Melvyn & McFadden, Daniel (ed.),Production Economics: A Dual Approach to Theory and Applications, volume 2, chapter 2, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mertens, Matthias, 2022. "Micro-mechanisms behind declining labor shares: Rising market power and changing modes of production," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    2. Mertens, Matthias, 2019. "Micro-mechanisms behind declining labour shares: Market power, production processes, and global competition," IWH-CompNet Discussion Papers 3/2019, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    3. Matteo G. Richiardi & Luis Valenzuela, 2024. "Firm heterogeneity and the aggregate labour share," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 38(1), pages 66-101, March.
    4. Georg Erber ; Alfred Haid, 1991. "Total Factor Productivity in the Federal Republic of Germany (1970- 1989): Results for Mining and Manufacturing Industries," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 33, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    5. Rude, James & Goddard, Ellen W., 1995. "Analysis of the Cost Structure for Processed Products: The Case of the Canadian Dairy Processing Sector," Working Papers 244804, University of Guelph, Department of Food, Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    6. Hiroaki HAYAKAWA, 2016. "Theory of the Firm: A Reformulation with Primary Factors of Production and Procurement of Ingredient Inputs," Journal of Economics and Political Economy, KSP Journals, vol. 3(3), pages 418-439, September.
    7. W. Erwin Diewert & Takanobu Nakajima & Alice Nakamura & Emi Nakamura & Masao Nakamura, 2011. "Returns to scale: concept, estimation and analysis of Japan's turbulent 1964–88 economy," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(2), pages 451-485, May.
    8. Ensar Yılmaz & Zeynep Kaplan, 2022. "Heterogeneity of market power: firm-level evidence," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 55(2), pages 1207-1228, May.
    9. Richmond, J, 2000. "Separability and Specification Tests," Economics Discussion Papers 8832, University of Essex, Department of Economics.
    10. Sahoo, A., 2008. "Essays on the Indian economy : Competitive pressure, productivity and performance," Other publications TiSEM 374e9035-815c-43fe-a68e-e, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    11. Craig Burnside & Martin Eichenbaum & Sergio Rebelo, 1995. "Capital Utilization and Returns to Scale," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1995, Volume 10, pages 67-124, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Amit Gandhi & Salvador Navarro & David Rivers, 2017. "How Heterogeneous is Productivity? A Comparison of Gross Output and Value Added," University of Western Ontario, Centre for Human Capital and Productivity (CHCP) Working Papers 201727, University of Western Ontario, Centre for Human Capital and Productivity (CHCP).
    13. Harrigan, James, 1997. "Technology, Factor Supplies, and International Specialization: Estimating the Neoclassical Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(4), pages 475-494, September.
    14. Simon Pröll & Giannis Karagiannis & Klaus Salhofer, 2019. "Advertising and Markups: The Case of the German Brewing Industry," Working Papers 732019, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Institute for Sustainable Economic Development.
    15. Jan De Loecker & Pinelopi K. Goldberg & Amit K. Khandelwal & Nina Pavcnik, 2016. "Prices, Markups, and Trade Reform," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 84, pages 445-510, March.
    16. Susanto Basu & John Fernald, 2001. "Why Is Productivity Procyclical? Why Do We Care?," NBER Chapters, in: New Developments in Productivity Analysis, pages 225-302, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Amil Petrin & Jerome Reiter & Kirk White, 2011. "The Impact of Plant-level Resource Reallocations and Technical Progress on U.S. Macroeconomic Growth," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 14(1), pages 3-26, January.
    18. Mark Vancauteren & Bruno Henry de Frahan, 2011. "Trade Policy, Competition and Productivity: The Impact of EU Harmonization in the Dutch Food Processing Industry," De Economist, Springer, vol. 159(4), pages 483-509, December.
    19. Sampi Bravo,James Robert Ezequiel & Jooste,Charl & Vostroknutova,Ekaterina, 2021. "Identification Properties for Estimating the Impact of Regulation on Markups and Productivity," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9523, The World Bank.
    20. Cali,Massimiliano & Le Moglie,Marco & Presidente,Giorgio, 2021. "Gain without Pain ? Non-Tariff Measures, Plants’ Productivity and Markups," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9654, The World Bank.

    More about this item

    Lists

    This item is featured on the following reading lists, Wikipedia, or ReplicationWiki pages:
    1. Identification Properties of Recent Production Function Estimators (ECTA 2015) in ReplicationWiki

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:emetrp:v:83:y:2015:i::p:2411-2451. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/essssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.