IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wii/wpaper/225.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Assessing Digital Leadership: Is the EU Losing out to the US?

Author

Listed:
  • Dario Guarascio
  • Roman Stöllinger

    (The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, wiiw)

Abstract

Since Leontief’s (1953) seminal work on the factor content of trade, the validity of the Heckscher-Ohlin-model has been judged not only on the basis of formal tests of the theory but also tested against prior expectation. In this vein, this paper uses the Heckscher-Ohlin-Vanek (HOV) approach to investigate whether supposed US leadership in the digital domain can be traced back to digital task endowments embodied in labour services. In a comparison between EU member states and the US, we find that the latter is more intensive in digital tasks than the EU and that this difference is explained by both an intensity-effect (US occupations being more digital-task intensive) and a structural component (relatively more digital-task intensive occupations). Viewed through the lens of the HOV theorem we find that the US is abundant in digital tasks relative to non-digital tasks, while the opposite is true for the EU. The standard tests for the predictive power of the HOV theorem are high and in line with the results for labour in previous literature.

Suggested Citation

  • Dario Guarascio & Roman Stöllinger, 2023. "Assessing Digital Leadership: Is the EU Losing out to the US?," wiiw Working Papers 225, The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, wiiw.
    • Handle: RePEc:wii:wpaper:225
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://wiiw.ac.at/assessing-digital-leadership-is-the-eu-losing-out-to-the-us-dlp-6486.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mariana Mazzucato, 2018. "Mission-oriented innovation policies: challenges and opportunities," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(5), pages 803-815.
    2. Praz, 2022. "Data Security," Springer Books, in: Link Technology to Your Long-Term Business Goals, chapter 0, pages 153-161, Springer.
    3. ., 2022. "Security, privacy and compliance," Chapters, in: The Rise of Blockchains, chapter 5, pages 98-124, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Trefler, Daniel & Zhu, Susan Chun, 2010. "The structure of factor content predictions," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 195-207, November.
    5. Matteo Sostero & Santo Milasi & John Hurley & Enrique Fernandez-Macias & Martina Bisello, 2020. "Teleworkability and the COVID-19 crisis: a new digital divide?," JRC Working Papers on Labour, Education and Technology 2020-05, Joint Research Centre.
    6. ., 2022. "Social security: a view from beyond the beltway," Chapters, in: Reforming Capitalism for the Common Good, chapter 7, pages 93-97, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    8. Trefler, Daniel, 1993. "International Factor Price Differences: Leontief Was Right!," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(6), pages 961-987, December.
    9. Li, Qi, 2022. "Security design without verifiable retention," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    10. Cecilia Rikap & Bengt-Åke Lundvall, 2021. "The Digital Innovation Race," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-030-89443-6, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rossi, Luca & Pasca, Maria Giovina & Arcese, Gabriella & Poponi, Stefano, 2024. "Innovation, researcher and creativity: A complex indicator for territorial evaluation capacity," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).

    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. Assaf Zimring, 2019. "Testing the Heckscher–Ohlin–Vanek theory with a natural experiment," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(1), pages 58-92, February.
    2. Coveri, Andrea & Cozza, Claudio & Guarascio, Dario, 2023. "Blurring boundaries: an analysis of the digital platforms-military nexus," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1364, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    3. Reimer, Jeffrey J., 2011. "The domestic content of imports and the foreign content of exports," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 173-184, April.
    4. Trefler, Daniel & Zhu, Susan Chun, 2010. "The structure of factor content predictions," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 195-207, November.
    5. Donald R. Davis & David E. Weinstein, 2001. "An Account of Global Factor Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1423-1453, December.
    6. Hugo Pinto & Jorge André Guerreiro & Manuel Fernández-Esquinas, 2023. "Sources of knowledge in the firm: a review on influential, internal and contextual factors in innovation dynamics," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 1-32, February.
    7. Satoshi Honma & Yushi Yoshida, 2019. "Convergence in pollution terms of trade," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(5), pages 603-627, July.
    8. Harald Fadinger, 2006. "Development Accounting in a Heckscher-Ohlin World," DEGIT Conference Papers c011_017, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade.
    9. Jäkel, Ina C. & Smolka, Marcel, 2017. "Trade policy preferences and factor abundance," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-19.
    10. Daniel Trefler, 1997. "Immigrants and Natives in General Equilibrium Trade Models," NBER Working Papers 6209, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Satoshi Honma & Yushi Yoshida, 2018. "Convergence in pollution terms of trade," Discussion Papers CRR Discussion Paper Series A: General 48, Shiga University, Faculty of Economics,Center for Risk Research.
    12. Hausmann, Ricardo & Stock, Daniel P. & Yıldırım, Muhammed A., 2022. "Implied comparative advantage," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(8).
    13. Fadinger, Harald, 2011. "Productivity differences in an interdependent world," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 221-232, July.
    14. Demmou Lilas, 2009. "Déterminants et nature des spécialisations Nord-Sud : quelques enseignements tirés de la littérature empirique," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 119(1), pages 71-94.
    15. Artal-Tur, Andrés & Castillo-Giménez, Juana & Llano-Verduras, Carlos & Requena-Silvente, Francisco, 2011. "The factor content of regional bilateral trade: The role of technology and demand," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 157-172, April.
    16. Nishioka, Shuichiro, 2012. "International differences in production techniques: Implications for the factor content of trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 98-104.
    17. Andrés Artal & Juana Castillo & Francisco Requena, 2006. "Contrastación empírica del modelo de dotaciones factoriales para el comercio interregional de España," Investigaciones Economicas, Fundación SEPI, vol. 30(3), pages 539-576, September.
    18. Baldwin, Richard & Robert-Nicoud, Frédéric, 2014. "Trade-in-goods and trade-in-tasks: An integrating framework," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 51-62.
    19. Kozo Kiyota, 2021. "The Leontief Paradox Redux," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 296-313, May.
    20. Francisco Requena & Andrés Artal & Juana Castillo, 2008. "Testing Heckscher— Ohlin—Vanek Model Using Spanish Regional Data," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 31(2), pages 159-184, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Comparative advantages; digitalisation; Heckscher-Ohlin-Vanek theorem; digital tasks;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F11 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Neoclassical Models of Trade
    • F14 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Empirical Studies of Trade
    • D57 - Microeconomics - - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium - - - Input-Output Tables and Analysis

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:wii:wpaper:225. 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: Customer service (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wiiwwat.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.