Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Reconsidering learning by exporting

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Review of World Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Self-selection and learning by exporting are the main explanations for the higher productivity of exporting firms. But, whereas evidence on self-selection is largely undisputed, results on learning by exporting are mixed and far from conclusive. However, recent research by De Loecker (J Int Econ 73(1):69–98, 2007) has shown that the conclusions from previous learning by exporting studies may have been driven by strong assumptions about the evolution of productivity and the role of export status. Relaxing these assumptions turns out to be critical to find evidence of learning by exporting in a representative sample of Spanish manufacturing firms. Our results indicate that the yearly average gains in productivity are around 3 % for at least 4 years.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See Greenaway and Kneller (2007a) and Wagner (2007, 2012) for thorough reviews of this literature.

  2. Silva et al. (2010) provide a detailed survey of the LBE literature. Further, Martins and Yang (2009) provide a meta-analysis of 33 empirical studies. Singh (2010) concludes that studies supporting self-selection overwhelm studies supporting LBE.

  3. See for example, Greenaway and Kneller (2004, 2007a, 2008), Girma et al. (2004), Van Biesebroeck (2005), Damijan and Kostevc (2006), De Loecker (2007, 2010), Serti and Tomasi (2008), Mánez-Castillejo et al. (2010), and Yu and Dai (2011).

  4. See also Kasahara and Rodrigue (2008), for an analogous approach to De Loecker (2010) but focusing on the analysis of the effect of imports on productivity.

  5. See http://www.funep.es/esee/ing/i_esee.asp for further details.

  6. We do not use any observation for 1990 as we cannot compute productivity for this year in this survey.

  7. We consider the original industry classification of the ESEE summarised in nine industries to guarantee enough observations per industry (we use the same nine industries classification than in Doraszelski and Jaumandreu 2009). A higher disaggregation makes unfeasible industry by industry productivity estimation.

  8. The results of export participation and export intensity could be biased by the fact that the ESEE only surveys firms with more than 10 workers.

  9. The law of motion for capital follows a deterministic dynamic process according to which \( k_{it} = (1 - \delta )k_{it - 1} + I_{it - 1} \). Thus, it is assumed that the capital the firm uses in period t was actually decided in period t − 1 (it takes a full production period for the capital to be ordered, received and installed by the firm before it becomes operative). The age of the firm is also considered as a deterministic state variable that evolves according to \( a_{it} = a_{it - 1} + 1 \). Labour and materials (unlike capital) are chosen in period t, the period they actually get used (and, therefore, they can be a function of \( \omega_{it} \)). These timing assumptions make them non-dynamic inputs, in the sense that (and again unlike capital) current choices for them have no impact on future choices.

  10. Both the investment of capital demand function and the demand for intermediate materials are assumed to be strictly increasing in ω it (in the case of the investment of capital this is assumed in the region in which i it  > 0). That is, conditional on k it and a it , a firm with higher ω it optimally invests more (or demands more materials).

  11. These estimates are available upon request.

  12. See Delgado et al. (2002) for a more detailed description of the application of the KS tests of stochastic dominance and Máñez-Castillejo et al. (2010) for a panel data application (analogous to ours).

  13. Abadie and Imbens (2008) show that due to the extreme non-smoothness of nearest neighbours matching, the standard conditions for bootstrapped standard errors are not satisfied, leading the bootstrap variance to diverge from the actual variance. This may be corrected either by subsampling (Politis et al. 1999) or using the Stata nnmatch command (Abadie et al. 2004). We report results from both approaches (see Table 5) and do not find substantial differences between the estimated standard errors.

  14. These estimates are reported in Appendix B in page 97 in De Loecker (2007).

  15. The choice of 5 years is a compromise between the minimum number of years needed to consider a firm a persistent exporter and the number of firms left in the sample after requiring a given number of years of uninterrupted exporting activity.

  16. Our definition of export starters precludes the presence of switchers in our analysis. A switcher is a firm that exports 1 year and after one or more years without exporting starts exporting again. In our analysis, a firm is considered as export starter in t if it has not exported during the sample periods previous to t and, therefore, we only consider a firm an export starter the first time it exports.

References

  • Abadie, A., Drukker, D., Herr, J., & Imbens, G. W. (2004). Implementing matching estimators for average treatment effects in Stata. The Stata Journal, 4(3), 290–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abadie, A., & Imbens, G. W. (2008). On the failure of the bootstrap for matching estimators. Econometrica, 76(6), 1537–1557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ackerberg, D., Benkard, L., Berry, S., & Pakes, A. (2007). Econometric tools for analyzing market outcomes. In J. Heckman & E. Leamer (Eds.), Handbook of econometrics (Vol. 6A). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ackerberg, D. A., Caves, K., & Frazer, G. (2006). Structural identification of production functions (Working Paper Department of Economics, UCLA).

  • Arnold, J., & Hussinger, K. (2005). Export behavior and firm productivity in german manufacturing: A firm-level analysis. Review of World Economics/Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 141(2), 219–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, S., & Ichino, A. (2002). Estimation of average treatment effects based on propensity scores. Stata Journal, 2(4), 358–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernard, A. B., & Jensen, J. B. (1999). Exceptional exporter performance: Cause, effect, or both? Journal of International Economics, 47(1), 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clerides, S. K., Lach, S., & Tybout, J. R. (1998). Is learning by exporting important? Micro-dynamic evidence from Colombia, Mexico, and Morocco. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113(3), 903–947.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damijan, J. P., & Kostevc, C. (2006). Learning by exporting: continuous productivity improvements or capacity utilization effects? Review of World Economics/Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 142(3), 599–614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Loecker, J. (2007). Do exports generate higher productivity? Evidence from Slovenia. Journal of International Economics, 73(1), 69–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Loecker, J. (2010). A note on detecting learning by exporting (NBER Working Papers 16548). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

  • Delgado, M. A., Fariñas, J. C., & Ruano, S. (2002). Firm productivity and export markets: A non-parametric approach. Journal of International Economics, 57(2), 397–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doraszelski, U., & Jaumandreu, J. (2009). R&D and Productivity: Estimating Production Functions when Productivity is Endogenous, mimeo, Harvard University.

  • Girma, S., Greenaway, D., & Kneller, R. (2004). Does exporting increase productivity? A microeconometric analysis of matched firms. Review of International Economics, 12(5), 855–866.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenaway, D., & Kneller, R. (2004). Exporting and productivity in the UK. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 20(3), 358–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenaway, D., & Kneller, R. (2007a). Firm heterogeneity, exporting and foreign direct investment. Economic Journal, 117(517), 134–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenaway, D., & Kneller, R. (2007b). Industry Differences in the Effect of Export Market Entry: Learning by Exporting? Review of World Economics/Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 143(3), 416–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenaway, D., & Kneller, R. (2008). Exporting, productivity and agglomeration. European Economic Review, 52(5), 919–939.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansson, P., & Lundin, N. (2004). Exports as indicator on or a promoter of successful Swedish Manufacturing Firms in the 1990s. Review of World Economics/Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 140(3), 415–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heckman, J., Ichimura, H., & Todd, P. (1997). Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator. Review of Economic Studies, 65, 261–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Study Group on Exports and Productivity (ISGEP). (2008). Understanding cross-country differences in exporter Premia: Comparable Evidence for 14 Countries. Review of World Economics/Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 144(4), 596–635.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasahara, H., & Rodrigue, J. (2008). Does the use of imported intermediates increase productivity? Plant-level evidence. Journal of Development Economics, 87(1), 106–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leuven, E., & Sianesi, B. (2003). PSMATCH2: Stata module to perform full Mahalanobis and propensity score matching, common support graphing, and covariate imbalance testing. Statistical Software Components S432001, Boston College Department of Economics, Revised 28 December 2006.

  • Levinsohn, J., & Petrin, A. (2003). Estimating production functions using inputs to control for unobservables. Review of Economic Studies, 70(2), 317–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mánez-Castillejo, J. A., Rochina-Barrachina, M. E., & Sanchis-Llopis, J. A. (2010). Does firm size affect self-selection and learning by exporting? The World Economy, 33(3), 315–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martins, P. S., & Yang, Y. (2009). The impact of exporting on firm productivity: A meta-analysis of the learning by exporting hypothesis. Review of World Economics/Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 145(3), 431–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melitz, M. (2003). The impact of trade on intra-industry reallocations and aggregate industry productivity. Econometrica, 71(6), 1695–1725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olley, G. S., & Pakes, A. (1996). The dynamics of productivity in the telecommunications equipment industry. Econometrica, 64(6), 1263–1297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Politis, D. N., Romano, J. P., & Wolf, M. (1999). Subsampling. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1985). Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score. The American Statistician, 39(1), 33–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Serti, F., & Tomasi, C. (2008). Self-selection and post-entry effects of exports: Evidence from Italian manufacturing firms. Review of World Economics/Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 144(4), 660–694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sianesi, B. (2004). An evaluation of the Swedish system of active labor market programs in the 1990s. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 86(1), 133–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silva, A., Africano, A. P., & Afonso, Ó. (2010). Learning by exporting: What we know and what we would like to know (FEP Working Papers 364). Universidade do Porto. Faculdade de Economia do Porto.

  • Singh, T. (2010). Does international trade cause economic growth? A survey. The World Economy, 33, 1517–1564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Biesebroeck, J. (2005). Exporting raises productivity in sub-saharan manufacturing plants. Journal of International Economics, 67(2), 373–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, J. (2002). The causal effects of export on firm size and labour productivity: First evidence from a matching approach. Economics Letters, 77(2), 287–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, J. (2007). Exports and productivity: A survey of the evidence from firm level data. The World Economy, 30(12), 60–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, J. (2012). International trade and firm performance: A Survey of Empirical Studies since 2006. Review of World Economics/Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 148(2), 235–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wooldridge, J. M. (2009). On estimating firm-level production functions using proxy variables to control for unobservables. Economics Letters, 104(3), 112–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, M., & Dai, M. (2011). Pre-export R&D, exporting and productivity gains: evidence from Chinese firms (China Trade Research Group Working Paper series, 11). Beijing: Peking University.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the comments and suggestions made by the editor and two anonymous referees and, also, the financial support from the Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación (projects ECO2011-25033, ECO2011-30323-C03-02 and SEJ2010-19088/ECON), the Generalitat Valenciana (project PROMETEO/068) and the Generalitat de Catalunya (“Xarxa de Referència d’R + D + I en Economia i Polítiques Públiques” and the 2009-SGR-322 Program). Usual caveats apply.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. QURE-CREIP Department of Economics, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Tarragona, Spain

    Miguel Manjón

  2. Department of Applied Economics II and ERICES, Universitat de València, Valencia, Spain

    Juan A. Máñez, María E. Rochina-Barrachina & Juan A. Sanchis-Llopis

Authors
  1. Miguel Manjón
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Juan A. Máñez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. María E. Rochina-Barrachina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Juan A. Sanchis-Llopis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Juan A. Máñez.

About this article

Cite this article

Manjón, M., Máñez, J.A., Rochina-Barrachina, M.E. et al. Reconsidering learning by exporting. Rev World Econ 149, 5–22 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10290-012-0140-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10290-012-0140-3

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation