Is East Germany successful in catching up? An empirical investigation of the technological capability in manufacturing industry
Jutta Günther, Harald Lehmann
VEST Journal for Science and Technology Studies,
No. 1,
2004
Abstract
Read article
Competition Policy in Central Eastern Europe in the Light of EU Accession
Jens Hölscher
Journal of Common Market Studies,
No. 2,
2004
Abstract
This study reviews the progress made in EU accession candidates on competition policy. The analysis shows that institution-building and legislation are well under way and that anti-trust practice is not too lax. Due to the diversity among the accession countries under review, the study finds that the strictly rule-based frame work of the EU might not be the most favourable solution for some candidates: firstly, the small and open economies of most candidates make it particularly difficult to define the ‘relevant market’ in competition cases. Secondly, the traditionally intense vertical integration of production in accession states calls for a reassessment of ‘vertical restraints’. The policy implications of this study suggest that the EU competition task force should take a proactive, case-by-case approach vis-à-vis its new members.
Read article
Innovation cooperation: experiences from East and West Germany
Jutta Günther
Science and Public Policy,
2004
Abstract
This paper deals with innovation cooperation as a means to support the ongoing catch-up process of the East German economy. Against prevalent beliefs, it can be shown that East German enterprises are more often involved in innovation co-operation than West German firms, and differences in cooperation partner priorities only reflect the given structural differences between the two regions. While cooperating enterprises in East and West Germany are clearly more innovative than their non-cooperating counterparts, a productivity advantage of these firms is (so far) only observable in West Germany. Reasons for this surprising finding are discussed.
Read article
Competition Policy in Central East Europe in light of EU Accession
Johannes Stephan
Journal of Common Market Studies,
2004
Abstract
This study reviews the progress made in EU accession candidates on competition policy. The analysis shows that institution-building and legislation are well under way and that anti-trust practice is not too lax. Due to the diversity among the accession countries under review, the study finds that the strictly rule-based frame work of the EU might not be the most favourable solution for some candidates: firstly, the small and open economies of most candidates make it particularly difficult to define the ‘relevant market’ in competition cases. Secondly, the traditionally intense vertical integration of production in accession states calls for a reassessment of ‘vertical restraints’. The policy implications of this study suggest that the EU competition task force should take a proactive, case-by-case approach vis-à-vis its new members.
Read article
Technological capability of foreign and West German investors in East Germany
Jutta Günther
IWH Discussion Papers,
No. 189,
2004
Abstract
Foreign direct investment (FDI) plays an important role for countries or regions in the process of economic catching-up since it is assumed – among other things – that FDI brings in new production technology and knowledge. This paper gives an overview about the development of FDI in East Germany based on official data provided by the Federal Bank of Germany. The investigation also includes a comparison of FDI in East Germany to Central East European countries. But the main focus of the paper is an analysis of the technological capability comparing majority foreign and West German owned firms to majority East German owned firms. It shows that foreign and West German subsidiaries in East Germany are indeed characterized by superior technological capability with respect to all indicators looked at (product innovation, research & development, organizational changes etc.).
Read article
Firm-Specific Determinants of Productivity Gaps between East and West German Industrial Branches
Johannes Stephan, Karin Szalai
IWH Discussion Papers,
No. 183,
2003
Abstract
Industrial productivity levels of formerly socialist economies in Central East Europe (including East Germany) are considerably lower than in the more mature Western economies. This research aims at assessing the reasons for lower productivities at the firm level: what are the firm-specific determinants of productivity gaps. To assess this, we have conducted an extensive field study and focussed on a selection of two important manufacturing industries, namely machinery manufacturers and furniture manufacturers, and on the construction industry. Using the data generated in field work, we test a set of determinant-candidates which were derived from theory and prior research in that topic. Our analysis uses the simplest version of the matched-pair approach, in which first hypothesis about relevant productivity level-determinants are tested. In a second step, positively tested hypothesis are further assessed in terms of whether they also constitute firm-specific determinants of the apparent gaps between the firms in our Eastern and such in our Western panels. Our results suggest that the quality of human capital plays an important role in all three industrial branches assessed. Amongst manufacturing firms, networking activities and the use of modern technologies for communication are important reasons for the lower levels of labour productivity in the East. The intensity of long-term strategic planning on behalf of the management turned out to be relevant only for machinery manufacturers. Product and process innovations unexpectedly exhibit an ambiguous picture, as did the extent of specialisation on a small number of products in the firms’ portfolio and the intensity of competition.
Read article
EU Accession Countries’ Specialisation Patterns in Foreign Trade and Domestic Production - What can we infer for catch-up prospects?
Johannes Stephan
IWH Discussion Papers,
No. 184,
2003
Abstract
This paper supplements prior analysis on ‘patterns and prospects’ (Stephan, 2003) in which prospects for the speed of future productivity growth were assessed by looking at the specialisation patterns in domestic production. This analysis adds the foreign trade sphere to the results generated in the prior analysis. The refined results are broadly in line with the results from the original analysis, indicating the robustness of our methods applied in either analysis. The most prominent results pertain to Slovenia and the Slovak Republic. Those two countries appear to be best suited for swift productivity catch-up from the viewpoint of sectoral specialisation. Poland and Estonia exhibit the lowest potentials. Only for the case of Poland would results suggest bleak prospects.
Read article
Evolving Structural Patterns in the Enlarging European Division of Labour: Sectoral and Branch Specialisation and the Potentials for Closing the Productivity Gap
Johannes Stephan
IWH-Sonderhefte,
No. 5,
2003
Abstract
This report summarises the results generated in empirical analysis within a larger EU 5th FP RTD-project on the determinants of productivity gaps between the current EU-15 and accession states in Central East Europe. The focus of research in this part of the project is on sectoral specialisation patterns emerging as a result of intensifying integration between the current EU and a selection of six newly acceding economies, namely Estonia, Poland, the Czech and Slovak Republics, Hungary and Slovenia. The research-leading question is concerned with the role played by the respective specialisation patterns for (i) the explanation of observed productivity gaps and for (ii) the projection of future potentials of productivity growth in Central East Europe.
For the aggregated level, analysis determines the share of national productivity gaps accountable to acceding countries’ particular sectoral patterns, and their role for aggregate productivity growth: in Poland, the Slovak Republic and Hungary, sectoral shares of national productivity gaps are considerable and might evolve into a ‘barrier’ to productivity catch-up.Moreover, past productivity growth was dominated by a downward adjustment in employment rather than structural change. With the industrial sector of manufacturing having been identified as the main source of national productivity gaps and growth, the subsequent analysis focuses on the role of industrial specialisation patterns and develops an empirical model to project future productivity growth potentials. Each chapter closes with some policy conclusions.
Read article
Unit labor costs and competitiveness - a micro econometric analysis for East Germany
Harald Lehmann
IWH Discussion Papers,
No. 180,
2003
Abstract
Die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung in Ostdeutschland hängt neben der Gründung neuer Unternehmen und der Attraktion auswärtiger Investitionen vor allem davon ab, wie es den bestehenden Unternehmen gelingt, ihre Wettbewerbsfähigkeit zu steigern bzw. auf einem hohen Niveau zu halten. Wettbewerbsfähige Betriebe sind auch immer rentable Betriebe. Sie sind in der Lage Eigenkapital aufzubauen, was eine wichtige Voraussetzung fur die Finanzierung von Innovationen und Investitionen, aber auch für eine gewisse Krisenfestigkeit ist. Damit tragen sie erheblich zum gesamtwirtschaftlichen Wachstum und zu höherer Beschäftigung bei.
Read article
Enterprise-related services in East-Germany – an investigation of the service sector statistics
Siegfried Beer
Wirtschaft im Wandel,
No. 12,
2003
Abstract
Die unternehmensbezogenen Dienstleistungen haben sich in Ostdeutschland – nach Angaben der Volkswirtschaftlichen Gesamtrechnung –seit 1990 beachtlich entwickelt. Ausdruck dafür ist u. a. die Zunahme der realen Bruttowertschöpfung um 9,5% (BIP: 4,9%) im Jahresdurchschnitt bis 2000. Aus der erstmalig vorliegenden Dienstleistungsstatistik (für 2000) ist zu entnehmen, dass die Unternehmen der unternehmensbezogenen Dienstleistungen in Ostdeutschland im Schnitt knapp neun Beschäftigte haben und damit nur geringfügig kleiner sind als die Unternehmen in Westdeutschland. Deutlich größer hingegen sind die Unterschiede in der durchschnittlichen Umsatzgröße und in der Produktivität (60% bzw. 45%). Dafür gibt es verschiedene Erklärungsansätze. Ein Hauptgrund besteht offenbar darin, dass die Unternehmen in Ostdeutschland niedrigere Erlöse wegen der deutlich geringeren Größe der Unternehmen erzielen, die diese Leistungen in Anspruch nehmen. Außerdem spielen die geringere Ertragskraft der nachfragenden Unternehmen, Unterschiede in der Branchenstruktur der unternehmensbezogenen Dienste und administrative Festlegungen zur Preisbildung eine Rolle.
Read article
