Cet article traite de l’évolution structurelle du commerce de gros français. Pour la période 1978-1989, les changements dans la distribution par taille des entreprises et de la productivité du travail ont été analysés pour les trois secteurs principaux. Dans les commerces de gros non alimentaire (secteur 58) et interindustriel (secteur 59), la tendance est à l’accroissement relatif du nombre d’entreprises opérant à faible effectif. Dans le commerce de gros alimentaire (secteur 57), par contre, la taille moyenne a augmenté. Puis, nous avons examiné si l’existence ou non des effets de taille a causé l’évolution observée dans la distribution par taille des entreprises. Nous avons utilisé la productivité du travail comme critère pour les effets de taille. Les économies d’échelle ont augmenté dans tous les trois secteurs principaux du commerce de gros français. Nous nous étions attendu à ce résultat pour le secteur 57, mais non pas pour les secteurs 58 et 59. De plus, les plus fortes augmentations d’économies d’échelle sont observées dans le secteur 57. Cela s’explique par les différences dans les distributions par taille des entreprises entre le secteur 57, d’une part, et les secteurs 58 et 59, d’autre part.

We embed the innovation production function in a model that analyzes the impact of innovation output on manufacturing multi-factor productivity (MFP) growth. We combine a market share model with a gross output production function. This revenue approach enables a ‘demand-shift’ interpretation of the contribution of innovation to MFP growth. We apply different sets of instrumental variables and different estimation methods to estimate simultaneously the returns from innovation investment to innovation output, the contribution of innovation output to productivity growth and the feedback link running from a firm’s overall sales performance to its innovation endeavor. We draw our empirical results from the second Community Innovation Survey (CIS-2) for the Netherlands. The estimation results from our model show that the impact of innovation differs between measures of firm performance, and that, in our data, the revenue function approach yields more sensible results for the contribution of innovation to MFP growth than the value-added production function framework. Furthermore, the results show that the estimation of return on innovation investment benefits from the inclusion of more information on the technological environment of the firm.

textabstractHow can labour productivity growth be raised in order to safeguard sustainable economic growth? This is the main question of this thesis. Labour productivity growth is the most important engine of economic growth in the OECD, and – in view of an ageing population – it will gain further importance for future prosperity. From this perspective, it is understandable that productivity is pushing the growth agenda in both academic and policymaking circles. If productivity is becoming increasingly important, then understanding differences in labour productivity patterns and its drivers becomes crucial. Predominantly, the role of two factors of labour productivity is considered in this book: research & development (R&D) and entrepreneurship. Although the importance of R&D for labour productivity development is deeply rooted in endogenous growth theory and the empirical literature, on many aspects of R&D both academics and policymakers are still in the dark. This thesis sheds light on a number of frequently asked questions: ‘How important exactly is R&D for productivity growth?’, ‘What determines R&D expenditure within a country?’, ‘Does the continuing internationalisation of R&D have consequences for economic growth in countries?’ and not in the least: ‘How can policy contribute to fostering R&D performance?’ Findings indicate that private, public and foreign R&D capital contribute as much as forty percent to labour productivity growth in the Netherlands. In addition, R&D expenditure is not exogenous and depends on a broad range of factors, such as the structure of the economy, the internationalisation process of R&D and institutional arrangements. Building on these results, the R&D shortfall of the Netherlands and the European Union is disentangled vis-a-vis the OECD and United States, respectively. The impact of entrepreneurship on labour productivity development is even more terra incognita than the role of R&D. Allegedly, entrepreneurship is an important conduit to reap the benefits of knowledge creation, but there are virtually no studies that show a long-run relationship between entrepreneurship and productivity development for an international panel of OECD countries. Empirical results in this book show that entrepreneurship has a stable and significant impact on the development of productivity levels. This thesis therefore provides new evidence of the important role that entrepreneurship and R&D play for our future welfare.

Recent productivity growth has been sluggish in the Netherlands. Baumol suggests that future productivity performance might be hampered by inadequate arrangements and institutions between the four sectors that drive innovation and growth: large firms, small firms, the universities and the government. In this paper we present the facts and figures of innovation and growth performance in the Netherlands. We also discuss Dutch innovation policies. While our findings show that the Netherlands still ranks highly in terms of actual levels of productivity and innovation, the developments in both areas are reason for concern. A structural reform of the industry-science interface in the Netherlands could lead to an improvement in the situation for the Netherlands in the medium term.

Several noted surveys on intra-industry dynamics have reached the conclusion from a large body of evidence that Gibrat's Law does not hold. However, almost all of these studies have been based on manufacturing or large scale services such as banking and insurance industries. There are compelling reasons to doubt whether these findings hold for small scale services such as the hospitality industries. In this paper we examine whether the basic tenet underlying Gibrat's Law– that growth rates are independent of firm size – can be rejected for the services as it has been for manufacturing. Based on a large sample of Dutch firms in the hospitality industries the evidence suggests that in most cases growth rates are independent of firm size. Validation of Gibrat's Law in some sub-sectors of the small scale services suggests that the dynamics of industrial organization for services may not simply mirror that for manufacturing. The present paper includes a survey of nearly 60 empirical studies on firm growth rates.

Several surveys on intra-industry dynamics have recently reached the conclusion from a large body of evidence that Gibrat's Law does not hold, i.e., the main finding is that firm growth decreases with firm size. However, almost all of these studies have been based on manufacturing. In this paper - in search of further evidence supporting the results recently obtained for a large sample of Dutch firms in the hospitality industry - we examine whether the assumption that growth rates are independent of firm size can be rejected for the services, as it has been for manufacturing, also in the case of Italy. Based on a large sample of Italian new-born firms in five business groups in the hospitality industry, the evidence suggests that growth rates are, in fact, independent of firm size in two business groups, while Gibrat's Law is rejected for the remaining three business groups and for the industry as a whole. These mixed results concerning Gibrat's Law in the services are consistent with the hypothesis that the dynamics of industrial organisation for services may not simply mirror that for manufacturing. Besides, the findings in this paper support the hypothesis that any general conclusion concerning Gibrat's Law cannot be reached without considering heterogeneity, at least among firms of different industries.

Several surveys on intra-industry dynamics have recently reached the conclusion from a large body of evidence that Gibrat's Law does not hold, i.e., the main finding is that firm growth decreases with firm size. In this paper - in search of further evidence supporting the results recently obtained for a large sample of small scale Dutch incumbent and new-born firms in the hospitality sector - we examine whether the assumption that growth rates are independent of firm size can be rejected for the services, as it has been for manufacturing, also in the case of Italian new-born firms in the hospitality sector. In fact, based on a large sample composed only by new-born firms in five business groups, the evidence suggests that Gibrat's Law is rejected for three business groups ones and for the industry as a whole, whereas it is confirmed for the two remaining business groups. Thus, also in some business groups in the hospitality sector smaller ones among new-born firms have initially to rush in order to reach a size comparable to that of larger entrants. However, firms growing very fast in the initial year(s) after start-up turn out to slow down their growth once they reach a size large enough to enhance their likelihood of survival.

Using the second Community Innovation Survey (CIS-2) for the Netherlands, we analyse the input and output stages of the innovation process and the links between the innovation process and overall economic performance. We investigate the existence of feedback links running from past economic performance to the input and the output stage of the innovation process and compare the results of a single-equation approach with the results obtained from a simultaneous-equation model.

Using two waves of the Community Innovation Survey for the Netherlands we integrate recent lines of research to estimate the contribution of innovation to manufacturing multi-factor productivity (MFP) growth. The model exploits the CIS data to control for the complementarity between internal and external knowledge bases and also investigates the importance of within-firm time interdependencies for inputs into innovation and innovation output. Our results show the benefits of including more information on the technological environment of firms. Furthermore, our model shows that we have a lower persistence of innovativeness measured from the output side than for R&D if we track the innovation performance of the same firms across time. It has also been found that the contribution of innovation to MFP increases if we use all available data. The latter result reflects the difficulty to account properly for the non-rivalry of innovation and the associated inter-firm “spillovers” of knowledge creation when using firm-level panel data only.

The extent of β- and σ-convergence of average labor productivity across manufacturing industries in 18 OECD countries over the period 1972–1992 shows large inter-industry differences. One reason for these differences is knowledge and capital barriers preventing the occurrence of catch-up. We find the level of average labor productivity, as a proxy for these barriers, is correlated with the extent of convergence.

textabstractA large literature has emerged focusing on the post-entry performance of firms and, in particular, on the links between firm growth, survival, size and age. While these studies have resulted in findings that are sufficiently consistent as to constitute Stylized Facts, virtually all of these studies are based on manufacturing. The purpose of this paper is to fill this gap in knowledge about the role of non- manufacturing in industrial organization, and in particular, in the post-entry performance of firms, or what happens to firms subsequent to entering an industry. We suggest theoretical reasons why the relationships between firm age and size on the one hand, and survival and growth on the other may, in fact, not be the same in services as they are for manufacturing. We use a longitudinal data base for Dutch firms in the retail and hotel and catering sectors to identify around 13,000 new-firm start-ups and 47,000 incumbents in the services and track them over subsequent years. We are then able test to see whether the Stylized Results identified based on manufacturing still hold in the services. The results suggest that the most fundamental relationships between firm size, age, survival and growth are strikingly different for services than for manufacturing. In terms of the dynamics of industrial organization, services may, in fact, not simply mirror the manufacturing sector.

In a recent paper Lichtenberg (1994) proposes a test of the convergence hypothesis that the variance of productivity across countries decreases over time. He argues that the ratio of the variance in the first period to that in the last period of the time series is F-distributed bur overlooks the dependency between these two variances. As a consequence, probabilities of committing a type II error of incorrectly rejecting the convergence hypothesis are large. This problem manifests most strongly in short time periods. Lichtenberg, for example, rejects the convergence hypothesis for a data set of 22 OECD countries over the 1960-1985 period. Using two alternative test statistics, we claim that there is strong empirical evidence for convergence in that time period.

A large literature has emerged focusing on the post-entry performance of firms and, in particular, on the links between firm growth, survival, size and age. While these studies have resulted in findings that are sufficiently consistent as to constitute stylized facts, virtually all of these studies are based on manufacturing. The purpose of this paper is to fill this gap in knowledge about the role of non-manufacturing in industrial organization and, in particular, in the post-entry performance of firms, or what happens to firms subsequent to entering an industry. We suggest theoretical reasons why the relationships between firm age and size on the one hand, and survival and growth on the other may, in fact, not be the same in services as they are for manufacturing. We use a longitudinal database for Dutch firms in the retail and hotel and catering sectors to identify around 13,000 new-firm start-ups and 47,000 incumbents in the services and track them over subsequent years. We are then able test to see whether the stylized results identified, based on manufacturing, still hold in the services. The results suggest that the most fundamental relationships between firm size, age, survival and growth are strikingly different for services than for manufacturing. In terms of the dynamics of industrial organization, services may, in fact, not simply mirror the manufacturing sector.