Abstract
We present industry-level evidence that manufacturing sectors that make use of services as inputs more intensively are more robust to shocks from import competition. Specifically, the negative effect of the China shock on US manufacturing employment is lower for industries with high services input intensity. Furthermore, our analysis reveals significant heterogeneity in the impact of different types of services, which points towards a fruitful research agenda on the role of services as a determinant of firm competitiveness.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Data are from US Bureau of the Census, at https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/statistics/historical/index.html and reflect balance-of-payments figures. Thus they do not include services that are sold by foreign affiliates of US multinationals, which are an important additional channel for international provision of services by US-owned companies (Francois and Hoekman 2010).
Berlingieri (2015) finds that firms increase their services input intensity in order to manage coordination complexity (proxied by the number of contested export destination markets).
On the one hand, offshoring reduces input prices and increases profits, which in turn potentially increases manufacturing production and labor demand. On the other hand, higher quality and cheaper service inputs may substitute for labor that is used in production, decreasing labor demand (Amiti and Wei 2006; Milberg and Winkler 2010b; Winkler 2010). Consistent with the theoretical ambiguity, empirical findings are mixed (Amiti and Wei 2005; 2006; Schöller 2007; Winkler 2010; Michel and Rycx 2012; Milberg and Winkler 2010a, 2015; Eppinger 2019). However, services offshoring tends to be associated with a higher demand for skilled labor at the firm level (Crinò 2010; Andersson et al. 2016).
Technical coefficients in Fig. 1 capture the technical relationship between US industries that prevailed in the early 1990s. The coefficients comprise the elements of the square matrix A defined as \(A\equiv YM\), where Y is a dimension n square matrix of zeros, except along the main diagonal, that includes the inverse output of each industry and M is the intermediate demand matrix. For each services-manufacturing sector pair (s, j), the technical coefficient is the element \(a_{sj}\) of A and represents the cost of the intermediate inputs from services sector s per dollar of total production of manufacturing sector j.
We define local labor markets according to Autor et al. (2013) to be 722 non-overlapping commuting zones which represent areas with a high degree of labor mobility within and very little mobility across zones. Our empirical specification follows closely Section 6 of Acemoglu et al. (2016). We refer the reader to these papers for an in-depth discussion of identification and instrumentation strategies.
The business services category includes professional services such as legal, accounting, management consulting, and engineering.
The nine census divisions are identified by eight dummy variables that group together subsets of CZs.
Our controls are not shown; they are the standard ones in the literature: the lags of local manufacturing employment share; college-educated share of population; foreign-born share of population; female employment share; share of routine occupations; and share of outsourcable occupations.
Controlling for endogeneity due to potential unobserved demand shocks with the use of the instrumentation strategy is important as the OLS point estimates (not reported) of \(\beta\) and \(\mu\) are \(-0.0378\)*** and 0.379*, respectively, which significantly underestimate this impact.
References
Acemoglu, D., Autor, D. H., Dorn, D., Hanson, G. H., & Price, B. (2016). Import competition and the great US employment sag of the 2000s. Journal of Labor Economics, 34(S1), S141–S198. https://doi.org/10.1086/682384.
Amiti, M., & Wei, S. J. (2005). Fear of service outsourcing: Is it justified? Economic Policy, 20(42), 308–347. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0327.2005.00140.x.
Amiti, M., & Wei, S. J. (2006). Service offshoring, productivity and employment: Evidence from the US. CEPR Discussion Paper 5475, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers, http://econpapers.repec.org/paper/cprceprdp/5475.htm.
Amiti, M., & Wei, S. J. (2009). Service offshoring and productivity: Evidence from the US. World Economy, 32(2), 203–220. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9701.2008.01149.x.
Andersson, L., Karpaty, P., & Savsin, S. (2016). Firm-level effects of offshoring of materials and services on relative labor demand. Review of World Economics, 152(2), 321–350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10290-015-0243-8.
Autor, D. H., Levy, F., & Murnane, R. J. (2003). The skill content of recent technological change: An empirical exploration. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(4), 1279–1333. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355303322552801.
Autor, D. H., Dorn, D., & Hanson, G. H. (2013). The China Syndrome: Local labor market effects of import competition in the United States. American Economic Review, 103(6), 2121–68. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.103.6.2121.
Autor, D. H., Dorn, D., Hanson, G. H., & Majlesi, K. (2020). Importing political polarization? The electoral consequences of rising trade exposure. American Economic Review,. (forthcoming).
Baldwin, R., Forslid, R., & Ito, T. (2015). Unveiling the evolving sources of value added in exports. Joint Research Program Series No. 161
Berlingieri, G. (2015). Managing export complexity: The role of service outsourcing. Retrieved July 20, 2018 from https://sites.google.com/site/giuseppeberlingieri/home/research.
Bloom, N., Draca, M., & Van Reenen, J. (2016). Trade induced technical change? The impact of Chinese imports on innovation, IT and productivity. The Review of Economic Studies, 83(1), 87–117.
Crinò, R. (2010). Service offshoring and white-collar employment. The Review of Economic Studies, 77(2), 595–632.
De Backer, K., Desnoyers-James, I., & Moussiegt, L. (2015). ‘Manufacturing or services—That is (not) the question’: The role of manufacturing and services in OECD economies. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 19, OECD Publishing, Paris.
Eppinger, P. S. (2019). Service offshoring and firm employment. Journal of International Economics, 117(C), 209–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2019.01.
Francois, J. (1990). Producer services, scale, and the division of labor. Oxford Economic Papers, 42(4), 715–729.
Francois, J., & Hoekman, B. (2010). Services trade and policy. Journal of Economic Literature, 48(3), 642–692.
Gervais, A., & Jensen, J. B. (2019). The tradability of services: Geographic concentration and trade costs. Journal of International Economics, 118, 331–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2019.03.003.
GlobeNewswire (2016) Carhartt sees clearly with cloud-enabled visibility. https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2016/09/26/874551/0/en/Carhartt-Sees-Clearly-With-Cloud-Enabled-Visibility.html.
Görg, H., & Hanley, A. (2011). Services outsourcing and innovation: An empirical investigation. Economic Inquiry, 49(2), 321–333. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.2010.00299.x.
Görg, H., Hanley, A., & Strobl, E. (2008). Productivity effects of international outsourcing: Evidence from plant level data. Canadian Journal of Economics, 41(2), 670–688. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5982.2008.00481.x.
Hijzen, A., Inui, T., & Todo, Y. (2010). Does offshoring pay? Firm-level evidence from Japan. Economic Inquiry, 48(4), 880–895. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.2008.00175.x.
Lu, Y., & Ng, T. (2012). Import competition and skill content in US manufacturing industries. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 95(4), 1404–1417. https://doi.org/10.1162/REST_a_00311.
Michel, B., & Rycx, F. (2012). Does offshoring of materials and business services affect employment? Evidence from a small open economy. Applied Economics, 44(2), 229–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2010.503932.
Milberg, W., & Winkler, D. (2010a). Economic insecurity in the new wave of globalization: Offshoring and the labor share under varieties of capitalism. International Review of Applied Economics, 24(3), 285–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/02692171003701479.
Milberg, W., & Winkler, D. (2010b). Financialisation and the dynamics of offshoring in the USA. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 34(2), 275–293.
Milberg, W., & Winkler, D. (2015). Offshoring and the labour share in Germany and the US: The role of different policy regimes. World Economics, 16(4).
Schettkat, R., & Yocarini, L. (2006). The shift to services employment: A review of the literature. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 17(2), 127–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2005.04.002.
Schöller, D. (2007). Service offshoring and the demand for less-skilled labor: Evidence from Germany. Hohenheimer Diskussionsbeiträge No. 287/2007
van Ark, B., O’Mahoney, M., & Timmer, M. P. (2008). The productivity gap between Europe and the United States: Trends and causes. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 22(1), 25–44. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.22.1.25.
Winkler, D. (2010). Services offshoring and its impact on productivity and employment: Evidence from Germany, 1995–2006. The World Economy, 33(12), 1672–1701. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9701.2010.01269.x.
Young, A. (2014). Structural transformation, the mismeasurement of productivity growth, and the cost disease of services. American Economic Review, 104(11), 3635–3667. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.11.3635.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to Lawrence White, Andrea Ariu, Paola Conconi, Caroline Freund, Lorenzo Caliendo, Jeff Frieden, Beata Javorcik, Doug Nelson, Marcelo Olarreaga, Marco Sanfilippo, Asha Sundaram, Thierry Verdier and members of the Galbino Project for helpful comments and suggestions on earlier versions of this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix
Appendix
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bamieh, O., Fiorini, M., Hoekman, B. et al. Services Input Intensity and US Manufacturing Employment Responses to the China Shock. Rev Ind Organ 57, 333–349 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-020-09770-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-020-09770-2