Robots, Occupations, and Worker Age: A Production-unit Analysis of Employment
Liuchun Deng, Steffen Müller, Verena Plümpe, Jens Stegmaier
IWH Discussion Papers,
No. 5,
2023
Abstract
We analyse the impact of robot adoption on employment composition using novel micro data on robot use in German manufacturing plants linked with social security records and data on job tasks. Our task-based model predicts more favourable employment effects for the least routine-task intensive occupations and for young workers, with the latter being better at adapting to change. An event-study analysis of robot adoption confirms both predictions. We do not find adverse employment effects for any occupational or age group, but churning among low-skilled workers rises sharply. We conclude that the displacement effect of robots is occupation biased but age neutral, whereas the reinstatement effect is age biased and benefits young workers most.
Read article
21.06.2022 • 14/2022
War drives up energy prices ‒ High inflation weighs on economy
While the lifting of nationwide coronavirus regulations boosts many service sectors such as the hospitality industry, supply bottlenecks are likely to weigh on the manufacturing sector throughout the summer and high inflation will dampen private consumption. Gross domestic product (GDP) in Germany is expected to decline slightly in the second quarter of 2022. The situation in the manufacturing sector is expected to ease towards the end of the year. The Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH) forecasts that GDP will increase by 1.5% in 2022, following an increase by 2.9% in 2021. In East Germany, GDP will increase by 1%.
Oliver Holtemöller
Read
The East-West German Gap in Revenue Productivity: Just a Tale of Output Prices?
Matthias Mertens, Steffen Müller
Abstract
East German manufacturers’ revenue productivity (value-added per worker) is some 8 (25) percent below West German levels, even three decades after German unification. Using firm-product-level data containing information on product quantities and prices, we analyse the role of product specialisation and reject the prominent ‚extended work bench hypothesis‘, stating a specialisation of Eastern firms in the intermediate input production as explanation for these sustained productivity differences. We decompose the East’s revenue productivity disadvantage into Eastern firms selling at lower prices and producing more physical output for given amounts of inputs within ten-digit product industries. This suggests that Eastern firms specialise vertically in simpler product varieties generating less consumer value but being manufactured with less or cheaper inputs. Vertical specialisation, however, does not explain the productivity gap as Eastern firms are physically less productive for given product prices, implying a genuine physical productivity disadvantage of Eastern compared to Western firms
Read article
The East-West German Gap in Revenue Productivity: Just a Tale of Output Prices?
Matthias Mertens, Steffen Müller
Abstract
East German manufacturers’ revenue productivity (value-added per worker) is some 8 (25) percent below West German levels, even three decades after German unification. Using firm-product-level data containing information on product quantities and prices, we analyse the role of product specialisation and reject the prominent ‚extended work bench hypothesis‘, stating a specialisation of Eastern firms in the intermediate input production as explanation for these sustained productivity differences. We decompose the East’s revenue productivity disadvantage into Eastern firms selling at lower prices and producing more physical output for given amounts of inputs within ten-digit product industries. This suggests that Eastern firms specialise vertically in simpler product varieties generating less consumer value but being manufactured with less or cheaper inputs. Vertical specialisation, however, does not explain the productivity gap as Eastern firms are physically less productive for given product prices, implying a genuine physical productivity disadvantage of Eastern compared to Western firms.
Read article
Intangible Capital and Productivity. Firm-level Evidence from German Manufacturing
Wolfhard Kaus, Viktor Slavtchev, Markus Zimmermann
IWH Discussion Papers,
No. 1,
2020
Abstract
We study the importance of intangible capital (R&D, software, patents) for the measurement of productivity using firm-level panel data from German manufacturing. We first document a number of facts on the evolution of intangible investment over time, and its distribution across firms. Aggregate intangible investment increased over time. However, the distribution of intangible investment, even more so than that of physical investment, is heavily right-skewed, with many firms investing nothing or little, and a few firms having very large intensities. Intangible investment is also lumpy. Firms that invest more intensively in intangibles (per capita or as sales share) also tend to be more productive. In a second step, we estimate production functions with and without intangible capital using recent control function approaches to account for the simultaneity of input choice and unobserved productivity shocks. We find a positive output elasticity for research and development (R&D) and, to a lesser extent, software and patent investment. Moreover, the production function estimates show substantial heterogeneity in the output elasticities across industries and firms. While intangible capital has small effects for firms with low intangible intensity, there are strong positive effects for high-intensity firms. Finally, including intangibles in a gross output production function reduces productivity dispersion (measured by the 90-10 decile range) on average by 3%, in some industries as much as nearly 9%.
Read article
05.09.2019 • 18/2019
Downturn in Germany continues
Trade disputes are causing international trade in goods to decline this year. The manufacturing industry in Germany is particularly affected by this. However, a robust labour market is supporting the economy. According to IWH autumn economic forecast, German gross domestic product (GDP) will increase by 0.5% in 2019. At 1%, output growth in East Germany is likely to be significantly higher than in West Germany.
Oliver Holtemöller
Read
04.04.2019 • 10/2019
Service providers in Berlin give boost to East German economy – implications of the Joint Economic Forecast and of official data on the East German economy in 2018
In its spring report, the Joint Economic Forecast group states that the upturn in Germany came to an end in the second half of 2018, mainly because the manufacturing sector is weakening due to a slowing international economy and to problems in the automotive industry. Accordingly, in places such as Saxony (1.2%), Thuringia (0.5%), and Saxony-Anhalt (0.9%), where manufacturing plays a particularly important role, gross domestic product (GDP) grew less than in Germany as a whole (1.4%).
Oliver Holtemöller
Read
Spatial Development Patterns in East Germany and the Policy to Maintain “Industrial Cores”
Gerhard Heimpold
H.-G. Jeong, G. Heimpold (Hrsg.), Economic Development after German Unification and Implications for Korea. Policy References 18-08. Sejong: Korea Institute for International Economic Policy,
2018
Abstract
This paper investigates the intra-regional development patterns in East Germany with particular reference to the manufacturing sector. When East Germany’s economy was ruled by the central planning regime, the share of industrial workforce in total employment was the greatest in entire Europe. It exceeded the respective value in the Soviet Union at that time. When the transition from a centrally planned economy to a market economy occurred, the East German manufacturing sector faced the greatest challenges.
Read article
Development of Survey Questions on Robotics Expenditures and Use in U.S. Manufacturing Establishments
Catherine Buffington, Javier Miranda, Robert Seamans
Center for Economic Studies (CES) Working Paper Series,
No. 44,
2018
Abstract
The U.S. Census Bureau in partnership with a team of external researchers developed a series of questions on the use of robotics in U.S. manufacturing establishments. The questions include: (1) capital expenditures for new and used industrial robotic equipment in 2018, (2) number of industrial robots in operation in 2018, and (3) number of industrial robots purchased in 2018. These questions are to be included in the 2018 Annual Survey of Manufactures. This paper documents the background and cognitive testing process used for the development of these questions.
Read article
