Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Regional industrial diversification: evidence from German gross value added

Regionale Diversifizierung der Branchenstruktur: Empirische Evidenz aus der Bruttowertschöpfung in den Ländern der Bundesrepublik Deutschland

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Review of Regional Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The idea of this paper is to apply modern portfolio theory to the gross value added shares of different economic activities in order to determine whether or not industry portfolios are efficient. Using the national accounts (Volkswirtschaftliche Gesamtrechnung) of Germany’s federal states for 2011, I run numerical simulations of their gross value added shares to determine the set of “efficient mean-variance combinations” (Markowitz, J Financ 7:77–91, 1952) of economic activities for each German federal state. The paper finds that their 2011 industry portfolios are in fact not efficient, and that rearranging the shares of economic activities increase total gross value added and decrease its risk. According to the numerical results, German federal states—at least Western Germany—could move from industrial to knowledge-based trading and service economies. The results are robust for different sample periods of Germany’s national accounts and the underlying assumptions of the numerical simulations are confirmed by using a sample of EU countries.

Zusammnfassung

Der Artikel überträgt die moderne Portfoliotheorie auf die Bruttowertschöpfung der Wirtschaftszweige in den Ländern der Bundesrepublik Deutschland und deren Branchenstrukturen. Anhand der Daten der volkswirtschaftlichen Gesamtrechnung (VGR) werden zunächst die „effizienten Mittelwert-Varianz Kombinationen“ nach Markowitz (1952) berechnet, um anschließend die Effizienz der Branchenstrukturen von 2011 in den deutschen Bundesländern zu untersuchen. Die numerischen Simulationen zeigen, dass deren Branchenstrukturen nicht effizient sind und eine Umstrukturierung der Anteile der Wirtschaftszweige an der Bruttowertschöpfung zu mehr regionalem Wachstum und Stabilität führt. Dies könnte durch einen Übergang von Industriegesellschaften zu wissensbasierten Handels- und Dienstleistungsgesellschaften in allen Bundesländern – insbesondere in den westdeutschen Flächenländern – erfolgen. Die Ergebnisse sind robust für unterschiedliche Zeiträume der VGR. Eine Stichprobe von EU-Ländern bestätigt darüber hinaus die zugrunde liegenden Annahmen der numerischen Simulationen.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Using real GDP data from Eurostat (2014), annual real growth rates for the EU-28 countries decreased from 3.1 % in 2007 to − 4.4 % in 2009 and after recovering to 1.7 % in 2011 fell again to 0.3 % in 2013.

  2. According to the nomenclature of units for territorial statistics (NUTS) by the EU, German federal states are at the NUTS-1 level.

  3. Technically, I calculate the efficient frontier for each combination (out of five economic activities; starting with a weight of 100 % for one sector) by 1 percentage point steps and record their risk-return characteristics. I then eliminate those with an unfavorable risk for each return (out of the predetermined return range of 0–10 %; starting with a return of 0 %) by 0.01 percentage point steps. Numerical simulations are carried out by the use of the GAUSS matrix programming: http://www.aptech.com/products/gauss-mathematical-and-statistical-system/.

  4. Table 3 in the appendix gives an overview of the VGR nomenclature of economic activities and their abbreviations.

  5. Since the sector “agriculture” contributes only a small proportion of Germany’s gross value added and its shares cannot be altered (or at least increased) significantly, I omit the sector and set its shares to zero. Thus, industry portfolios of the federal states on the efficient frontier are characterized by a maximum of five out of six sectors (n = 5).

  6. Testing of the null hypothesis of “homogeneity of variances” using two 10-year interval for the period 1990–2009 lead to almost the same results.

  7. Table 10 in the appendix shows in addition the average gross value added change for three 5-year intervals and the entire 1996–2010 period.

References

  • Baldwin RE et al (2003) Economic geography and public policy. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin RE, Krugman PR (2004) Agglomeration, integration and tax harmonization. Europ Econ Rev 48(1):1–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barth J, Kraft J, West P (1975) A portfolio theoretical approach to industrial diversification and regional employment. J Reg Sci 15(1):9–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bigerna S (2013) The regional growth-instability frontier in Italy. Atlantic Econ J 41(4):463–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Board J, Sutcliffe C (1991) Risk and income tradeoffs in regional policy: a portfolio theoretic approach. J Reg Sci 31(2):191–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandra S (2002) A test of the regional growth-instability frontier using state data. Land Econ 78(3):442–462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandra S (2003) Regional economy size and the growth-instability frontier: evidence from Europe. J Reg Sci 43(1):95–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conroy ME (1974) Alternative strategies for regional industrial Diversification. J Reg Sci 14(1):31–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conroy ME (1975) The concept and measurement of regional industrial diversification. Southern Econ J 41(3):492–505

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eurostat (2014) Reale BIP-Wachstumsrate. http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&language=en&pcode=tec00115&plugin=1. Accessed 15 Oct 2015

  • Ezcurra R (2011) Unemployment volatility and regional specialization in the European Union. Reg Stud 45(8):1121–1137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ezcurra R, Rios V (2015) Volatility and regional growth in europe: does space matter? Spatial Econ Anal 10(3):344–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kluge J (2015) Sectoral diversification as insurance against economic instability. ifo working paper No. 216

  • Lande PS (1994) Regional industrial structure and economic growth and instability. J Reg Sci 34(3):343–360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markowitz H (1952) Portfolio selection. J Financ 7(1):77–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramey G, Ramey VA (1995) Cross–country evidence on the link between volatility and growth. Amer Econ Rev 85(5):1138–1151

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharpe W (1963) A simplified model for portfolio analysis. Manage Sci 9(2):277–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel PB, Johnson TG, Alwang J (1995) Regional economic diversity and diversification. Growth Change 26(2):261–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tobin J (1958) Liquidity preference as behavior towards risk. Rev Econ Stud 25(1):65–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Volkswirtschaftliche Gesamtrechnungen der Länder VGRdL (2014) Bruttoinlandsprodukt, Bruttowertschöpfung in den Ländern der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 1991 bis 2013 (Berechnungstand: August 2013/Februar 2014), Reihe1, Länderergebnisse Band 1. Statistische Ämter des Bundes und der Länder

  • World Bank (2013) World Development Indicators. The World Bank. http://data.worldbank.org/indicator. Accessed 15 Oct 2015

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of International Business, University of Heilbronn, Max-Planck-Straße 39, 74081, Heilbronn, Germany

    Kurt A. Hafner

Authors
  1. Kurt A. Hafner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kurt A. Hafner.

Additional information

This paper has benefited greatly from the comments of Jörn Kleinert and three anonymous referees. I am grateful to Uwe Behringer for his efforts on a previous version. I am, of course, responsible for any errors.

Appendix

Appendix

Fig. 6
figure 6

Industry structure in EU countries, 1991–2010

Full size image
Table 3 Nomenclature of Economic Activities in the Volkswirtschaftliche Gesamtrechnung. (Source: National accounts (Volkswirtschaftliche Gesamtrechnung) of the federal states of Germany (calculated as of August 2013/February 2014), own abbreviation)
Full size table
Table 4 Gross Value Added (in m €) for German Federal States, 2011. (Source: National accounts (Volkswirtschaftliche Gesamtrechnung) of the federal states of Germany (calculated as of August 2013/February 2014), own calculation)
Full size table
Table 5 Actual vs. Optimal Portfolio for West German Territorial States, 2011. (Source: National accounts (Volkswirtschaftliche Gesamtrechnung) of the federal states of Germany (calculated as of August 2013/February 2014), own calculation)
Full size table
Table 6 Actual vs. Optimal Portfolio for German City-States, 2011. (Source: National accounts (Volkswirtschaftliche Gesamtrechnung) of the federal states of Germany (calculated as of August 2013/February 2014), own calculation)
Full size table
Table 7 Actual vs. Optimal Portfolio for East German Territorial States, 2011. (Source: National accounts (Volkswirtschaftliche Gesamtrechnung) of the federal states of Germany (calculated as of August 2013/February 2014), own calculation)
Full size table
Table 8 Robustness Test, mean of price-adjusted growth rates and standard deviation. (Source: National accounts (Volkswirtschaftliche Gesamtrechnung) of the federal states of Germany (calculated as of August 2013/February 2014), own calculation)
Full size table
Table 9 Dominant Industry Portfolio for the German Federal States, 2011. (Source: National accounts (Volkswirtschaftliche Gesamtrechnung) of the federal states of Germany (calculated as of August 2013/February 2014), own calculation)
Full size table
Table 10 Test for Homogeneity of Variance for Belgium, France, United Kingdom and Luxemburg, 5-year interval: 1996–2010. (Source: World Bank (2013), own calculation)
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hafner, K.A. Regional industrial diversification: evidence from German gross value added. Rev Reg Res 36, 169–193 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10037-016-0105-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10037-016-0105-4

Keywords

Schlüsselwörter

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation