160 likes | 179 Views
Explore the impact of competition on innovation and productivity in the Dutch retail sector from 1993 to 2002. Understand the complex interplay between competition, innovation, and productivity growth based on empirical data and models. Dive deep into how more competition may stimulate innovation and productivity growth in Dutch retail.
E N D
Dutch retail trade on the rise?Impact of competition on innovation and productivity Harold Creusen*, Björn Vroomen, Henry van der Wiel, Fred Kuypers CPB Netherlands Bureau of Economic Policy Analysis *e-mail: hpwac@cpb.nl
Background • Competition may stimulate • lower prices and efficient production • innovation • Efficient production and innovation entail productivity growth • Many policy measures in 1990s focussed on more competition • New Competition Act in 1998 • Regulatory reform since 1996, also in retail trade
Background • Labour productivity in Dutch retail • missed strong productivity growth of US • slightly lost its strong position in EU Labour productivity (per hours worked) relative to EU-average, 1979-2002
Questions I. How are competition, innovation and productivity related? II. Did competition affect innovation in retail? III. Did competition and innovation contribute to productivity growth in retail? • Conclusion: more competition in Dutch retail may stimulate innovation and productivity growth
I. Relations • Relation between three blocks: Competition Static efficiency InvertedU-curve? Productivity Productivity gap? Innovation Dynamic efficiency
II. Innovation: model • Aghion et al.: • inverted U-relationship between competition and innovation • higher productivity gap between firms amplifies inverted U-relationship • Explanation of innovation: inn = (φ0 + φ1 RPM + φ2RPM 2 ) (1 + ψ1PG) +φ3ms with inn log innovation outlays (firm level) RPM competition indicator (5-digit industry level) PG productivity gap with leader (firm level) ms log market share (firm level)
II. Innovation: data and method • Sources: • CIS-innovation surveys, Statistics Netherlands (1996,1998 and 2000) • annual surveys of ‘Production Statistics’, Statistics Netherlands (1993-2002) • Method: • innovation outlays left sensored: no innovation in 75% of firms • innovation estimated by TOBIT I-method
II. Innovation: results • No inverted U-relation between competition and innovation • Estimation based on linear relation: inn = φ0 + φ1RPM+φ3ms with inn log innovation (firm level) RPM competition indicator (5-digit industry level)
III. Productivity growth: model • Split TFP-growth (Solow decomposition) in contributions of competition and innovation • Explanation of productivity growth: Δp = Φ0+ Φ1 RPM + Φ2INN-1+ Φ3 (Δk - Δl) + Φ4 Δl ───────┬──────── TFP-growth with Δp productivity growth (firm level) (Δk - Δl) capital intensity (firm level) Δl labour (economies of scale, firm level)
III. Productivity growth: data and method • Source: annual surveys of ‘Production Statistics’, Statistics Netherlands (1993-2002) • Method: simple OLS
Conclusions • No inverted U-relationship but positive relation between competition and innovation • Both competition and innovation have a positive impact on productivity growth • So more competition in Dutch retail may stimulate productivity growth • on the short term by reductions in X-inefficiency • on the long term by innovation
Issues for future research • Functional form of relation between competition and innovation ? • Feed back of (dispersion in) productivity levels on competition ?