Advertisement

Small Business Economics

, Volume 24, Issue 1, pp 1–15 | Cite as

Firm Growth, Size, Age and Behavior in Japanese Manufacturing

  • Takehiko YasudaEmail author
Article

Abstract

This paper investigates the relationship between firm growth and firm size, firm age and firm behavior, such as R&D activity and subcontracting, based on the data of nearly 14,000 Japanese manufacturing firms. “The stylized facts” that firm size and age have a negative effect on firm growth are confirmed in the case of Japanese manufacturing firms. Also, a firm’s survivability rises with its size and age. R&D expenditure per employee has a significant positive effect on firm growth, which justifies the argument made by Hall (1987). Although subcontracting to only one company has no significant effect on firm growth, it has a significant positive effect on a firm’s survivability. In addition, subcon-tracting firms depending on only one company as a customer are subject to no significant age effects. This possibly suggests that the age effect itself has some relation to the extent of the trade network.

Keywords

Firm Size Industrial Organization Significant Positive Effect Stylize Fact Manufacturing Firm 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aaronovitch, Sam and Malcolm C. Sawyer, 1975, ‘Mergers, Growth and Concentration’, Oxford Economic Papers New Series 27, 136–155.Google Scholar
  2. Asanuma, Banri, 1988, ‘Japanese Manufacturer-Supplier Relationships in International Perspective: The Automobile Case’, Working Paper No. 8, Faculty of Economics Kyoto University.Google Scholar
  3. Arrow, Kenneth J., 1962, ‘The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing’, Review of Economic Studies 29, 155–173.Google Scholar
  4. Audretsch, David B., Luuk Klomp and A. Roy Thurik, 1997, ‘Do Services Differ From Manufacturing? The Post-Entry Performance of Firms in Dutch Services’, Center for Economic Policy Research, Discussion Paper 1718.Google Scholar
  5. Baily, Martin N., Eric J. Bartelsman and John Haltiwanger, 1996, ‘Downsizing and Productivity Growth: Myth of Reality?’, Small Business Economics 8(4), 259–278.Google Scholar
  6. Dunne, Paul and Alan Hughes, 1994, ‘Age, Size, Growth and Survival: UK Companies in the 1980s’, The Journal of Industrial Economics 43(2), 115–140.Google Scholar
  7. Evans, David S., 1987(a), ‘The Relationship Between Firm Growth, Size, and Age: Estimates for 100 Manufacturing Industries’, The Journal of Industrial Economics 35(4), 567–581.Google Scholar
  8. Evans, David S., 1987(b), ‘Tests of Alternative Theories of Firm Growth’, The Journal of Political Economy 95(4), 657–674.Google Scholar
  9. Greene, William H., 1993, Econometric Analysis, Fourth Edition, Prentice-Hall, Inc.Google Scholar
  10. Griliches, Zvi and Haim Regev, 1992, ‘Productivity and Firm Turnover in Israeli Industry: 1979–1988’, NBER Working Paper 4059.Google Scholar
  11. Hall, Bronwyn H., 1987, ‘The Relationship Between Firm Size and Firm Growth in the U.S. Manufacturing Sector’, The Journal of Industrial Economics 35(4), 583–606.Google Scholar
  12. Harhoff, Dietmar, Konrad Stahl and Michael Woywode, 1998, ‘Legal Form, Growth and Exit of West German Firms - Empirical Results for Manufacturing, Construction, Trade and Service Industries’, The Journal of Industrial Economics 46(4), 453–488.Google Scholar
  13. Jovanovic, Boyan, 1982, ‘selection and Evolution of Industry’, Econometrica 50, 649–670.Google Scholar
  14. Kawasaki, Seiichi and John McMillan, 1987, ‘The Design of Contracts: Evidence from Japanese Subcontracting’, Journal of the Japanese and International Economies 1, 327–349.Google Scholar
  15. Macpherson, Michael A., 1996, ‘Growth of Micro and Small Enterprises in Southern Africa’, Journal of Development Economics 48(2), 253–277.Google Scholar
  16. Mengistae, Taye, 1996, ‘Age-Size Effects in Productive Efficiency: A Second Test of the Passive Learning Model’, Center for the Study of African Economies Working Paper Series 96/02.Google Scholar
  17. Okamuro Hiroyuki, 2001, ‘Risk Sharing in the Supplier Relationship: New Evidence from the Japanese Automotive Industry’, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 45, 361–381.Google Scholar
  18. Variyam, Jayachandran N. and David S. Kraybill, 1992, ‘Empirical Evidence on Determinants of Firm Growth’, Economics Letters 38(1), 31–36.Google Scholar
  19. Wagner, Joachim, 1992, ‘Firm Size, Firm Growth and Persistence of Chance?Testing GIBRAT’s Law with Establishment Data from Lower Saxny, 1978–1989’, Small Business Economics 4, 121–131.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research Institute of EconomyTrade and IndustryChiyoda-ku TokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations