Abstract
We analyse the competitive performance of yards within the U.S. shipbuilding industry based on historical order book data. The large U.S. yards that survived the recent industry contraction have done so by achieving a good product mix and remaining competitive in the quest for military contracts. Yards that did not position themselves well in terms of product mix, or failed to succeed in the competition for military contracts, have reduced operations or shut down entirely.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
*The authors thank Andrew Solow for discussions of the model; Hank Marcus, Robert Solow, and Jesse Aussubel for helpful suggestions; and Mary Schumacher for excellent research assistance. Valuable comments on the subject of shipyard productivity and competitiveness were provided by David Enman and Trey LeBlanc at Alabama Shipyard; Kermit Hudson and Danny Bruhl at Ingalls Shipbuilding; Bob Monastero, Peter Jaquith, and Wayne Butterfield at NASSCO; Mike Hammes (Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Ships); Bob Schaffran (Maritech Program, MarAd); and Andy Dallas (Office of Naval Research and Maritech Program, MarAd); along with many of their colleagues. Funding for this research was provided by the Sloan Foundation under Grant No. 95-12-3. WHOI contribution number 10191.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jin, D., Kite-Powell, H. Historical Performance of Shipyards in the United States: A Dynamic Shift-Share Analysis. Marit Econ Logist 2, 195–216 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1057/ijme.2000.17
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/ijme.2000.17