Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Bhaumik, Sumon K.; Dimova, Ralitza; Kumbhakar, Subal C.; Sun, Kai (2012)
Publisher: Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) Bonn
Types: Research
Subjects: C14, D24, marginal effect, K31, textiles industry, institutional quality, institutional quality, firm performance, marginal effect, textiles industry, firm performance, O43
jel: jel:C14, jel:D24, jel:K31, jel:O43
ddc: ddc:330
Using a novel modeling approach, and cross-country firm level data for the textiles industry, we examine the impact of institutional quality on firm performance. Our methodology allows us to estimate the marginal impact of institutional quality on productivity of each firm. Our results bring into question conventional wisdom about the desirable characteristics of market institutions, which is based on empirical evidence about the impact of institutional quality on the average firm. We demonstrate, for example, that once both the direct impact of a change in institutional quality on total factor productivity and the indirect impact through changes in efficiency of use of factor inputs are taken into account, an increase in labor market rigidity may have a positive impact on firm output, at least for some firms. We also demonstrate that there are significant intra-country variations in the marginal impact of institutional quality, such that the characteristics of “winners” and “losers” will have to be taken into account before policy is introduced to change institutional quality in any direction.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • [1] Acemoglu, Daron & Johnson, Simon (2005). Unbundling institutions, Journal of Political Economy 113, 949-995.
    • [2] Acemoglu, Daron & Shimer, Robert (2000). Productivity gains from unemployment insurance, European Economic Review 44, 1195-1224.
    • [3] Arulampalam, Wiji & Booth, Alison L. (2002). Training and labour market exibility: Is there a trade o ? British Journal of Industrial Relations 36, 521-536.
    • [4] Bhaumik, Sumon Kumar & Estrin, Saul (2007). How transition paths di er: Enterprise performance in Russia and China, Journal of Development Economics 82, 374-392.
    • [5] Bhaumik, Sumon Kumar, Gangopadhyay, Shubhashis & Krishnan, Shagun (2008). Policy, economic federalism, and product market entry: The Indian experience, European Journal of Development Research 20, 1-30.
    • [6] Botero, Juan et al. (2004). The regulation of labor, Quarterly Journal of Economics 119, 1339-1382.
    • [7] Commander, Simon & Svejnar, Jan (2011). Business environment, exports, ownership, and rm performance, Review of Economics and Statistics 93, 309-337.
    • [8] Dasgupta, Partha (1993). An Inquiry into Well-Being and Destitution, New York: Oxford University Press.
    • [9] Dollar, David, Hallward-Driemeier, Mary & Mengistae, Taye (2005). Investment climate and rm performance in developing countries, Economic Development and Cultural Change 54, 1-31.
    • [10] Eichengreen, Barry & Iversen, T. (1999). Institutions and economic performance: Evidence from the labour market, Oxford Review of Economic Policy 15, 121-138.
    • [11] Gri th, Rachel, Redding, Stephen & Van Reenen, John (2004). Mapping the two faces of R&D: Productivity growth in a panel of OECD industries, Review of Economics and Statistics 86, 883-895.
    • [13] Katz, Lawrence & Meyer, Bruce (1990). The impact of the potential duration of unemployment bene ts on the duration of unemployment, Journal of Public Economics 41, 45-72.
    • [14] Klapper, Leora, Laeven, Luc & Rajan, Raghuram (2004). Business environment and rm entry, Working paper no. 3232, The World Bank, Washington, D.C.
    • [15] Levine, Ross (1998). The legal environment, banks and long run economic growth, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking 30, 596-613.
    • [16] Li, Qi, Huang, Cli , Li, Dong & Fu, Tsu-tan (2002). Semiparametric smooth coe cient models, Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 20, 412-422.
    • [17] Li, Qi and Racine, Je rey (2006). Nonparametric Econometrics: Theory and Practice, Princeton University Press.
    • [18] Li, Qi and Racine, Je rey (2010). Smooth varying-coe cient estimation and inference for qualitative and quantitative data, Econometric Theory 26, 1-31.
    • [19] Michie, Jonathan & Sheehan, Maura (1999). HMR practices, R&D expenditure and innovative investment: Evidence from the UKs 1990 workplace industrial relations surveys (WIRS), Industrial and Corporate Change 8, 211-234.
    • [20] Nickell, Stephen & Layard, Richard (1999), Labor market institutions and economic performance, In: Ashenfelter, Orley & Card, David (Eds.), Handbook of Labor Economics, Volume 3, Elsevier, Chapter 46, pp. 3029-3084.
    • [23] Robinson, Peter (1988). Root-n-consistent semiparametric regression, Econometrica 56, 931-954.
    • [24] Saint-Paul, Gilles (2004). Why are European countries diverging in their unemployment experience? Journal of Economic Perspectives 18, 49-68.
    • Figure 5: of marginal impact of institutional quality (SPSC model) (a) Employment law
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article