Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Sectoral Technical Progress and Aggregate Skill Formation

  • Published:
Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recent studies discuss micro-transmission mechanisms to measure spillover effects of MNC (Multinational Corporations) activity on human capital in host countries. We develop an aggregate transmission mechanism to show that technology deepening in advanced sectors affect economy-wide skill formation, not analyzed in previous studies. Sector-specific advanced technological input and borrowing from local capital market at preferential rates dampens rate of skill formation if local firms are more skill-intensive. Liberal trade policies applied only to MNC sector may lower traditional export if credit subsidy offered to MNCs is simultaneously withdrawn.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. There is also possibility of joint ventures between foreign firms and local private and public firms. See Svejnar and Smith (1984) and Marjit et al. (1995) for comparisons between joint ventures and FDI by MNCs. Local firms acquiring foreign technology often enter into joint venture that brings a significant component of the foreign firm into the host country.

  2. We focus only on general skill acquired by the mass. Our purpose is to see if sector-specific skill upgrade affects the general skill level.

  3. The government schools in developing countries usually operate on this basis. A percentage of eligible children are selected each year by lottery and are inducted in government schools while other applicants must find private facilities or do without it. The students also receive some financial support to stay in school. This may take the form of direct assistance at a fixed rate (stipend, mid-day meals, books, school uniform, subsidised housing facility, etc.). Many countries have hugely subsidised industrial training institutes for training potential industrial workforce.

  4. This assumption regarding preferential treatment has earlier been discussed in Batra (1986) and Batra and Ramachandran (1980) as reputation building strategy on the part of bank and non-bank financial institutions in the host country. Subsidy to industries has also been a well-known practice towards creation of jobs. See Cassidy and Strobl (2004) in this regard.

  5. Detailed calculations are available in the Appendix.

References

  • Baldwin R, Braconier H, Forslid R (2005) Multinationals, endogenous growth, and technological spillovers: theory and evidence. Rev Int Econ 13(5):945–963

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batra RN (1986) A general equilibrium model of multinational corporations in developing economies. Oxf Econ Pap New Ser 38(2):342–353

    Google Scholar 

  • Batra RN, Ramachandran R (1980) Multinational firms and the theory of international trade and investment. Am Econ Rev 70(3):278–290

    Google Scholar 

  • Beladi H, Choi EK (1995) On the emergence of multinational corporations in developing economies: a note. Reg Sci Urban Econ 25:675–684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berman E, Bound J, Machin S (1998) Implications of skill-biased technological change: international evidence. Q J Econ 113(4):1245–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blomström M, Kokko A (2003) Human capital and inward FDI. CEPR Discussion Paper No. 3762, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Borensztein E, Gregorio J, Lee W (1998) How does foreign direct investment affect economic growth? J Int Econ 45(1):115–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis EG, Alexander JM (2006) Global and local knowledge: glocal transatlantic public-private partnerships for research and technological development. Palgrave Macmillan, NY

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis EG, Campbell D (2006) MODE 3: Knowledge creation, diffusion and use in innovation networks and knowledge clusters: a comparative systems approach across the United States, Europe and Asia. CT: Praeger

  • Cassidy M, Strobl E (2004) Subsidizing industry: an empirical analysis of Irish manufacturing, J Ind Compet Trade 4(2):95–107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty C, Nunnenkamp P (2008) Economic reforms, FDI, and economic growth in India: a sector level analysis. World Dev 36(7):1192–1212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chkir IE, Cosset J-C (2001) Diversification strategy and capital structure of multinational corporations. J Multinatl Financ Manag 11:17–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunha F, Heckman J (2007) The technology of skill formation. IZA Discussion Paper No. 2550, Bonn

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunha F, Heckman J, Lochner L, Masterov D (2006). Interpreting the evidence on life cycle skill formation. In: Hanushek E, Welch F (eds) Handbook of the economics of education. Vol. 1: Ch. 12, 697–812, North Holland

  • Findlay R, Kierzkowski H (1983) International trade and human capital: a simple general equilibrium model. J Polit Econ 91(6):957–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorg H (2000) Multinational companies and indirect employment: measurement and evidence. Appl Econ 32:1809–1818

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorg H, Strobl E (2001) Multinational companies and productivity spillovers: a meta-analysis. Econ J 111(475):F723–F739

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenaway D, Nelson D (2001) Globalization and labour markets: literature review and synthesis, research paper No. 2001/29, Research paper series, globalisation and labour markets programme. University of Nottingham, Nottingham

    Google Scholar 

  • Haskel J, Pereira S, Slaughter M (2007) Does inward foreign direct investment boost the productivity of domestic firms? Rev Econ Stat 89(3):482–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Head K, Ries J (2002) Offshore production and skill upgrading by Japanese manufacturing firms. J Int Econ 58(1):81–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones RW (1971) The specific-factor model in trade, theory and history. In: Bhagwati JN et al. (eds) Trade, balance of payments and growth, North Holland, Amsterdam

  • Kar S, Beladi H (2004) Skill Formation and Trade Reform – Welfare Perspective of Developing Countries, Japan and the World Economy 16(1)35–54

  • Kim CF, Margetis S, Pantzalis C (2009) Financial sector diversification and MNC valuation. J Multinatl Financ Manag 19:343–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim YJ, Lee J-W (2011) Technological change, human capital structure, and multiple growth paths. Japanese Economic Review. 62, no. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5876.2009.00507.x

  • Kokko A, Zejan M, Tansini R (2001) Trade regimes and spillover effects of FDI: evidence from Uruguay. Rev World Econ 137(1):124–149

    Google Scholar 

  • Krugman P (2000) Technology, trade and factor prices. J Int Econ 50:51–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leamer E (1998) In search of stolper-samuelson linkages between international trade and lower wages. In: Collins S (ed) Imports, exports and the American worker. Brookings institution. 141–202

  • Marjit S, Broll U, Mallick I (1995) A theory of overseas joint ventures. Econ Lett 47:367–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markusen JR, Trofimenko N (2009) Teaching locals New tricks: foreign experts as a channel of knowledge transfers. J Dev Econ 88(1):120–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritchie BK (2002) Foreign direct investment and intellectual capital formation in southeast asia, OECD development centre, OECD development centre working papers. 194, Geneva

  • Slaughter M (2002) Skill upgrading, in developing countries: has inward foreign direct Investment played a role? OECD development centre, OECD development centre working papers: 192, Geneva

  • Svejnar J, Smith S (1984) The economics of joint ventures in less developed countries. Q J Economics 99(1):149–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu B (2000) Multinational enterprises, technology diffusion, and host country productivity growth. J Dev Econ 62(2):477–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao J, Wang K (2009) Analysis of the technology spillovers of multinational corporations. Transnatl Corp Rev 1(2):28–37

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are very grateful to an anonymous reviewer for comments and suggestions that improved the paper significantly. The usual disclaimer applies.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saibal Kar.

Appendices

Appendix 1

From Section 2: The construction of matrix follows. From (13) and (14),

$$ \left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {{\lambda_{KY }}} & {{\lambda_{KS }}} \\ {{\lambda_{SY }}} & {-1} \\ \end{array}} \right]\left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {\widehat{Y}} \\ {\widehat{S}} \\ \end{array}} \right]=\left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {-\frac{{{\lambda_{KX }}}}{{{\lambda_{TX }}}}} \\ {-\frac{{{\lambda_{SX }}}}{{{\lambda_{TX }}}}} \\ \end{array}} \right]\widehat{\overline{T}} $$
(A1)

From Section 3: Taking percentage changes, from (5), \( {\theta_{SY }}{{\widehat{w}}_S}+{\theta_{KY }}\widehat{r}=\widehat{P}_Y^{*} \)

Using (6),

$$ {\theta_{KS }}\widehat{r}={{\widehat{w}}_S}\,\;\mathrm{or},\;\,\widehat{r}=\frac{{{{\widehat{w}}_S}}}{{{\theta_{KS }}}} $$
(A2)

Finally, from (4), \( {\theta_{TX }}\widehat{\tau}+{\theta_{SX }}{{\widehat{w}}_S}+{\theta_{KX }}{{\widehat{r}}_X}=0 \). Therefore using (A2), \( {\theta_{SY }}{{\widehat{w}}_S}+\frac{{{\theta_{KY }}}}{{{\theta_{KS }}}}{{\widehat{w}}_S}=\widehat{P}_Y^{*} \). Again from the labor and capital endowment equations and substituting factor price changes:

$$ {\lambda_{SY }}\widehat{Y}-\widehat{S}=\left[ {{\lambda_{SX }}{\theta_{KX }}{\sigma_X}\left( {{\theta_{KS }}-\frac{1}{\alpha }} \right)+{\lambda_{SY }}{\theta_{KY }}{\sigma_Y}\left( {{\theta_{KS }}-1} \right)} \right]\frac{{\widehat{P}_Y^{*}}}{{{{{\widetilde{\theta}}}_{KY }}}} $$
(A3)

and

$$ {\lambda_{KY }}\widehat{Y}+{\lambda_{KS }}\widehat{S}=-\left[ {{\lambda_{KX }}{\theta_{SX }}{\sigma_X}\left( {{\theta_{KS }}-\frac{1}{\alpha }} \right)\frac{{{{\widehat{P}}^{*}}_Y}}{{{{{\widetilde{\theta}}}_{KY }}}}+{\lambda_{KY }}{\theta_{SY }}{\sigma_Y}\left( {{\theta_{KS }}-1} \right)-{\lambda_{KS }}{\theta_{LS }}{\sigma_S}} \right]\frac{{\widehat{P}_Y^{*}}}{{{{{\widetilde{\theta}}}_{KY }}}} $$
(A4)

So, from (10): \( {\lambda_{LS }}\widehat{S}={\lambda_{LS }}{\theta_{KS }}{\sigma_S}\frac{{\widehat{P}_Y^{*}}}{{{{{\widetilde{\theta}}}_{KY }}}}+{{\widehat{L}}_E} \). Using these,

$$ \left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {{\lambda_{SY }}} & {-1} \\ {{\lambda_{KY }}} & {{\lambda_{KS }}} \\ \end{array}} \right]\left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {\widehat{Y}} \\ {\widehat{S}} \\ \end{array}} \right]=\left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {{\lambda_{SY }}{\theta_{KY }}{\sigma_Y}\left( {{\theta_{KS }}-1} \right)+{\lambda_{SX }}{\theta_{KX }}{\sigma_X}\left( {{\theta_{KS }}-\frac{1}{\alpha }} \right)} \\ {-{\lambda_{KX }}{\theta_{SX }}{\sigma_X}\left( {{\theta_{KS }}-\frac{1}{\alpha }} \right)-{\lambda_{KY }}{\theta_{SY }}{\sigma_Y}\left( {{\theta_{KS }}-1} \right)+{\lambda_{KS }}{\theta_{LS }}{\sigma_S}} \\ \end{array}} \right]\frac{{{{\widehat{P}}^{*}}_Y}}{{{{{\widetilde{\theta}}}_{KY }}}} $$

This solves for \( \left[ {\widehat{Y},\widehat{S}} \right] \):

$$ \widehat{Y}=\frac{1}{{{{{\widetilde{\lambda}}}_{KY }}}}\left( \begin{array}{*{20}c} {\lambda_{KS }}{\lambda_{SY }}{\theta_{KY }}{\sigma_Y}\left( {{\theta_{KS }}-1} \right)+{\lambda_{KS }}{\lambda_{SX }}{\theta_{KX }}{\sigma_X}\left( {{\theta_{KS }}-\frac{1}{\alpha }} \right)+{\lambda_{KX }}{\theta_{SX }}{\sigma_X}\left( {{\theta_{KS }}-\frac{1}{\alpha }} \right) \hfill \\ +{\lambda_{KY }}{\theta_{SY }}{\sigma_Y}\left( {{\theta_{KS }}-1} \right)-{\lambda_{KS }}{\theta_{LS }}{\sigma_S} \hfill \\\end{array} \right) $$
$$ \widehat{S}=\frac{{{{\widehat{P}}^{*}}_Y}}{{{{{\widetilde{\theta}}}_{KY }}{{{\widetilde{\lambda}}}_{KY }}}}\left[ {-{\sigma_X}\left( {{\theta_{KS }}-\frac{1}{\alpha }} \right)\beta_X^S-\left( {{\theta_{KS }}-1} \right)\beta_Y^S{\sigma_Y}+\beta_S^S{\sigma_S}} \right] $$

According to the conditions in (25), \( \widehat{Y}\frac{>}{<}0\;\;while\;\;\widehat{S} > 0 \) from (26). QED.

Appendix 2

From (23),

$$ \widehat{Y}=\frac{1}{{{{{\widetilde{\lambda}}}_{KY }}}}\left[ {\left( {{\theta_{KS }}-1} \right){\beta_Y}{\sigma_Y}+\left( {{\theta_{KS }}-\frac{1}{\alpha }} \right){\beta_X}{\sigma_X}-{\beta_S}{\sigma_S}} \right]\frac{{{{\widehat{P}}^{*}}_Y}}{{{{{\widetilde{\theta}}}_{KY }}}} $$
(A5)
$$ \widehat{S}=\frac{{{{\widehat{P}}^{*}}_Y}}{{{{{\widetilde{\theta}}}_{KY }}{{{\widetilde{\lambda}}}_{KY }}}}\left[ {-{\sigma_X}\left( {{\theta_{KS }}-\frac{1}{\alpha }} \right)\beta_X^S-\left( {{\theta_{KS }}-1} \right)\beta_Y^S{\sigma_Y}+\beta_S^S{\sigma_S}} \right] $$
(A6)

where, \( {\beta_Y}=\left[ {{\lambda_{KS }}{\lambda_{SY }}{\theta_{KY }}+{\lambda_{KY }}{\theta_{SY }}} \right]>0,\;{\beta_X}=\left[ {{\lambda_{KS }}{\lambda_{SX }}{\theta_{KX }}+{\lambda_{KX }}{\theta_{SX }}} \right]>0 \)

$$ {\beta_S}=\left[ {{\lambda_{KS }}{\theta_{LS }}} \right]>0,\quad \beta_X^S=\left[ {{\lambda_{KX }}{\lambda_{SY }}{\theta_{SX }}+{\lambda_{KY }}{\lambda_{SX }}{\theta_{KX }}} \right]>0,\quad \beta_Y^S=\left[ {{\lambda_{KY }}{\lambda_{SY }}} \right]>0 $$
(A7a)

and \( \beta_S^S={\lambda_{KS }}{\theta_{LS }} > 0 \).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kar, S., Sinha, C. Sectoral Technical Progress and Aggregate Skill Formation. J Ind Compet Trade 14, 159–172 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10842-013-0152-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10842-013-0152-2

Keywords

JEL classifications

Navigation