Growth and Structural Transformation

Herrendorf, Berthold; Rogerson, Richard; Valentinyi, Ákos

doi:10.1016/b978-0-444-53540-5.00006-9

Cited by 661 publications

(580 citation statements)

References 76 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

525

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This argument is in line with Herrendorf, Rogerson, and Valentinyi (2014), who documented that the employment share of the agriculture sector could have been as high as 70% and the employment share of the manufacturing and service sectors could have been as low as 10% before 1970 in OECD countries, implying that the employment share of personal services is fairly low at the beginning of the period covered. Therefore, we can illustrate that the share of employment in the personal services sector also follows a hump-shape as in the manufacturing sector.…”

Section: Structural Transformation and Urbanizationsupporting

confidence: 74%

“…1 However, this within-service-sector structural change observed by Duarte and Restuccia (2012) is another stylized fact that has not been addressed in the literature (Herrendorf, Rogerson, and Valentinyi 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…However, all the models mentioned above fail to address the stylized fact occurring within the service sector, that business services intensity increases with development and urbanization (Duarte and Restuccia 2012;Herrendorf, Rogerson, and Valentinyi 2014). In practice, for example, the financial and business services subsector in Singapore experienced the highest employment growth rate within the service industry, while the manufacturing industry shed 10% of its workers in the 1990s.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is crucial in the literature that, during their period of structural transformation and urbanization, OECD countries observe the greatest productivity growth in the agriculture sector, followed by the manufacturing sector, and the least productivity growth in the service sector. In addition to studying the OECD countries, there are some case studies of less developed countries: Kuznets (1966) examines not only 13 OECD countries but also former Soviet republics between 1800 and 1960, while Herrendorf, Rogerson, and Valentinyi (2014) examine the main OECD countries and the Republic of Korea as well from 1970 to 2007. These studies report that the agriculture sector ranks first in total factor productivity (TFP) growth, followed by the manufacturing sector and then the service sector.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Openness and Urbanization: The Case of the People's Republic of China

2016

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in Asian Development Bank InstituteThe Working Paper series is a continuation of the formerly named Discussion Paper series; the numbering of the papers continued without interruption or change. ADBI's working papers reflect initial ideas on a topic and are posted online for discussion. ADBI encourages readers to post their comments on the main page for each working paper (given in the citation below). Some working papers may develop into other forms of publication. The views expressed in this paper are the views of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of ADBI, ADB, its Board of Directors, or the governments they represent. ADBI does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this paper and accepts no responsibility for any consequences of their use. Terminology used may not necessarily be consistent with ADB official terms.Working papers are subject to formal revision and correction before they are finalized and considered published.Asian Development Bank Institute Kasumigaseki Building 8F 3-2-5 Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-ku Tokyo 100-6008, Japan AbstractUrbanization usually occurs with structural transformation driven by a "push" from agricultural productivity growth and a "pull" from industrial productivity growth, and usually the former exceeds the latter. This paper presents a simple model to illustrate how the open policy in the People's Republic of China (PRC) since 1979 reversed the pattern such that the "pull" effect dominated the "push" effect during the PRC's structural transformation and urbanization. This model helps explain why the PRC, whose industrial productivity growth exceeds its agricultural productivity growth, has experienced a standard pattern of structural transformation. The paper also demonstrates how a developing country's business services intensity increases with its urbanization.

show abstract

Section: Structural Transformation and Urbanizationsupporting

confidence: 74%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Openness and Urbanization: The Case of the People's Republic of China

2016

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We focus our attention on the manufacturing and services industries, which have been highlighted as part of U.S.'s structural change as labor has reallocated from manufacturing to services (e.g. Herrendorf et al (2014)). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Credit and the Labor Share: Evidence from U.S. States

Leblebicioğlu¹,

Weinberger²

2017

gwp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We analyze the role of credit markets in explaining the changes in the U.S. labor share by evaluating the effects of state-level banking deregulation, which resulted in improved access to cheaper credit. Utilizing a difference-in-differences strategy, we provide causal evidence showing labor share declined following the interstate banking deregulation. We show that the lower cost of credit, increase in the availability of credit, and greater bank competition in each state are mechanisms that led to the decline in the labor share. We use this evidence to obtain the elasticity of labor share with respect to borrowing costs, which itself is informative about the aggregate elasticity of substitution between capital and labor. Finally, we focus on manufacturing and services to show that the impact of banking deregulation is particularly important in capital intensive and external finance dependent industries.JEL codes: E21, E22, E25, G21, G28

show abstract