Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Trade, Labor Share, and Productivity in India’s Industries

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Labor Income Share in Asia

Part of the book series: ADB Institute Series on Development Economics ((ADBISDE))

Abstract

This paper explores whether trade can explain a part of the sharp decline in the labor share of Indian formal industries from around 30% in 1980 to less than 10% in 2014. Decline in strikes and lockouts, reduced labor time lost from disputes per factory and increased use of contract workers in all major states in India are signs of reduced bargaining power. In order to estimate the influence of trade, the mark-up and bargaining power affecting the labor share and resultant productivity is derived. A semi-parametric approach is applied on a 3-digit level of industrial data over major states during 1998–2014 to regress Solow residual (the proxy for productivity) on trade share along with its interaction terms capturing market imperfections. The results confirm that trade, by dampening the bargaining power of labor, reduces labor share and hence raises productivity. It is argued that the joint effects of market size and competition arising out of trade cannot dominate the adverse effect of specialization in the presence of unions. The degree of specialization or comparative advantage that appears due to the increased market share of the most productive firms, who require fewer workers, thereby reducing the demand for workers with the trade. The drop in demand weakens bargaining power and shifts away distributive share from workers. But the competitive policy encouraging entry can negate such adverse effects of trade, to a large extent.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Acemoglu, D. & Restrepo, P. (2018). Artificial Intelligence, Automation and Work, NBER Working Paper No. 24196. https://www.nber.org/papers/w24196.

  • Aghion, P., Burgess, R., Redding, S., & Zilibotti, F. (2008). The unequal effects of liberalization: evidence from dismantling the license raj in india. American Economic Review, 94(4), 1397–1412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahluwalia, I. J. (1991). Productivity and growth in indian manufacturing. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahsan, A., & Pages, C. (2009). Are all labor regulations equal? evidence from indian manufacturing. Journal of Comparative Economics, 37(1), 62–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahsan, R., & Mitra, D. (2014). Trade liberalization and labors slice of the pie: evidence from indian firms. Journal of Development Economics, 108, 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amiti, M. & Davis, D. R. (2012) Trade, firms, and wages: theory and evidence. The Review of Economic Studies, 79(1), 1–6, https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdr016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arbache, J. S. (2004). Does trade liberalization always decrease union bargaining power? Economia, 5(1), 99–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arkolakis, C., Costinot, A., Donaldson, D. & Rodrguez-Clare, A. (2015). The Elusive Pro-Competitive Effects of Trade, NBER Working Paper w21370, National Bureau of Economic Research. www.nber.org.

  • Arrow, K. J., Chenery, H. B., Minhas, B. S., & Solow, R. M. (1961). Capital-labor substitution and economic efficiency. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 43(3), 225–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Autor, D., Dorn, D., Katz, Lawrence F., Patterson, C., & Van Reenen, J. (2017). Concentrating on the fall of the labor share. American Economic Review, 107(5), 180–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balakrishnan, P. & Pushpangadan, K. (1994). Total factor productivity growth in manufacturing industry: a fresh look. Economic and Political Weekly, 29(30).

    Google Scholar 

  • Balakrishnan, P., Parameswaran, M., Pushpangadan, K., & Babu, S. M. (2006). Liberalization, market power, and productivity growth in Indian industry. Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 9(1), 5573.

    Google Scholar 

  • Besley, T., & Burgess, R. (2004). Can regulation hinder economic performance? evidence from india. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119(1), 91–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhagwati, J. & Srinivasan, T. N. (1975). Foreign Trade Regimes and Economic Development, India. XF2006172468.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhalotra, S. R. (1998). The puzzle of jobless growth in indian manufacturing. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 60(1), 5–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharjea, A. (2009). The effects of employment protection legislation on indian manufacturing. Economic and Political Weekly, 44(22), 55–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharjea, A. (2019). Labour market flexibility in Indian industry: a critical survey of the literature, CDE Working Paper No. 296, Delhi School of Economics, http://www.cdedse.org/pdf/work296.pdf

  • Brock, E., & Dobbelaere, S. (2006). Has international trade affected workers bargaining power? Review of World Economics, 142(2), 233–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dao, M. C., Das, M., Koczan, Z. & Weicheng, L. (2017). Why is labour receiving a smaller share of global income? theory and empirical evidence. In International Monetary Fund, Stock No. WPIEA2017169 www.imf.org.

  • Das, D. K. (2004). Manufacturing productivity growth under varying trade regimes, 1980–2000. Economic and Political Weekly, 39(05), 423–433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, C., Matusz, S., & Shevchenko, A. (2008). Globalization and firm level adjustment with imperfect labor markets. Journal of International Economics, 75(2), 295–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Loecker, J. & Eeckhout, J. (2018). Global Market Power. National Bureau of Economics Research, Working Paper Series, 24768, NBER.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixit, A. K., & Stiglitz, J. E. (1977). Monopolistic competition and optimum product diversity. American Economic Review, 67(3), 297–308.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobbelaere, S. (2004). Estimation of price-cost margins and union bargaining power for belgian manufacturing. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 22, 1381–1398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dougherty, S. (2009). Labour regulation and employment dynamics at the state level in india. Review of Market Integration, 1(3), 295–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dumont, M., Rayp, G., & Willemé, P. (2006). Does internationalization affect union bargaining power? an empirical study for five eu countries. Oxford Economic Papers, 58(1), 77–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dutta, P. V. (2007). Trade protection and industry wages in india. ILR Review, 60(2), 268–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edmond, C., Midrigan, V., & Xu, D. Y. (2015). Competition, markups, and the gains from international trade. American Economic Review, 105(10), 3183–3221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eichengreen, B., & Gupta, P. (2013). The two waves of service-sector growth. Oxford Economic Papers, 65(1), 96–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eichengreen, B. & Gupta, P. (2011). The service sector as India’s road to economic growth. NBER Working paper No. w16757, National Bureau of Economic Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elsby, M., Hobijn, B. & Sahin, A. (2013). The Decline of the U.S. Labor Share. Working Paper Series 2013–27, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feenstra, R. C., & Hanson G. H. (1997). Productivity measurement and the impact of trade and technology on wages: estimates for the U.S., 1972–1990. NBER Working Papers 6052, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldar, B. (2013). Wages and wage share in india during the post-reform period. The Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 56(1), 75–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldar, B. N., & Kumari, A. (2003). Import of liberalization and productivity growth in Indian manufacturing industries in the 1990s. Developing Economics, 41(4), 436–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, P. & Helble, M. (2018). Adjustment to Trade Opening: The Case of Labor Share in India’s Manufacturing Industry. ADBI Working Paper 845. Tokyo: Asian Development Bank Institute. Available: https://www.adb.org/publications/adjustment-trade-opening-labor-share-india-manufacturing-industry

  • Hasan, R., Mitra, D., & Ramaswamy, K. V. (2007). Trade reforms, labor regulations, and labor-demand elasticities: empirical evidence from india. Review of Economics and Statistics, 89(3), 466–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helpman, E., & Itskhoki, O. (2010). Labor market rigidities, trade and unemployment. Review of Economic Studies, 77(3), 1100–1137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helpman, E. & Krugman, P. R. (1985). Market Structure and Foreign Trade, MIT Press, Cambridge MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsieh, C.-T., & Klenow, P. J. (2009). Misallocation and manufacturing TFP in China and India. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124(4), 1403–1448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ILO (2017). The World Employment and Social Outlook 2017, Trends, Labour Market Trends and Policy Evaluation Unit of the ILO Research Department.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaksson, A. (2007). Determinants of Total Factor Productivity: A Literature Review. Staff Working Paper 2/2007, www.unido.org

  • Jones, R. W. (1965). The structure of simple general equilibrium model. Journal of Political Economy, 73, 557–572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karabarbounis, L., & Neiman, B. (2014). The global decline of the labor share. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 129, 61–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kathuria, R., Porth, S., Kathuria, N. N., & Kohli, T. (2010). Competitive priorities and strategic consensus in emerging economies: evidence from india. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 30, 879–896. https://doi.org/10.1108/014435710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kehrig, M. & Vincent, N. (2017). Growing productivity without growing wages: The micro-level anatomy of the aggregate labor share decline. Economic Research Initiatives at Duke (ERID) Working Paper No. 244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krishna, P., & Mitra, D. (1998). Trade Liberalization, market discipline and productivity growth: new evidence from India. Journal of Development Economics, 56, 447–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krugman, P. (1980). Scale Economies, product differentiation, and the pattern of trade. The American Economic Review, 70(5), 950–959.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, S. (2006). A decomposition of total productivity growth: a regional analysis of indian industrial manufacturing growth. International Journal of Product Perform Management, 55(3/4), 3113–3131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinsohn, J., & Petrin, A. (2003). Estimating production functions using inputs to control for unobservables. Review of Economic Study, 70(1), 317–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, J. & Treichel, V. (2012). Applying the growth identification and facilitation framework: The Case of Nigeria. In Li, J. (ed) New Structural Economics, The World Bank, Washington DC, pp. 215–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, J. Y. & Treichel, V. (2012). Learning from China’s rise to escape the middle-income trap: A new structural economics approach to latin America. In Policy Research Working Paper 6165. World Bank, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madsen, J. B., Saxena, S. & James, B. A. (2009). The indian growth miracle and endogenous growth. Journal of Development Economics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2009.06.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maiti, D. (2009). Institution, network and industrialisation: Field evidence on flexibility and fragmentation from India. In IPPG Discussion Paper 26, Consortium of Institutions for Pro-Poor Growth, University of Manchester, http://www.ippg.org.uk/papers/dp26.pdf.

  • Maiti, D. (2013). Market imperfections, trade reform and total factor productivity growth: Theory and practices from India. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 40(2), 407–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maiti, D. (2014). Reform, productivity growth and formal labour market in India. London: Routledge Publisher.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maiti, D. (2018). Trade, Market Imperfection and Labour Share’ CDE Working Paper No. 292, http://www.cdedse.org/pdf/work292.pdf.

  • McCalman, P. (2018). International trade income distribution and welfare. Journal of International Economies, 118, 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melitz, M. J., & Ottaviano, G. (2008). Market size, trade and productivity. Review of Economic Studies, 75(1), 295–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melitz, M. J. & Redding, S. J. (2014). Heterogeneous firms and trade. In Gopinath, G., Helpman, E. & Rogoff, K. (eds.). Handbook of International Economics, Vol 4, pp. 1–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milner, C., Vencappa, D., & Wright, P. (2007). Trade policy and productivity growth in Indian manufacturing. World Economy, 30(2), 249–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neary, P. (2016). International trade in general oligopoly equilibrium. Review of International Economics, 24(4), 669–698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olley, S., & Pakes, A. (1996). The dynamics of productivity in the telecommunication equipment industry. Econometrica, 64(5), 1263–1297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the twentieth century. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Restuccia, D., & Rogerson, Richard. (2008). Policy distortions and aggregate productivity with heterogeneous plants. Review of Economic Dynamics, 11(4), 707–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodrik, D. (1998). Why do more open economies have bigger governments? Journal of Political Economy, 106(5), 997–1032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodrik, D. (1997). Has globalization gone too far?. Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sehgal, S., & Chandan, S. (2010). Impact of infrastructure on output, productivity and efficiency: evidence from the indian manufacturing industry. Indian Growth and Development Review, 3(2), 100–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, M. (2001). International trade and labor-demand elasticities. Journal of International Economics, 54(1), 609–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweeney, P. (2017). IMF Study of Downward Share of Labour Income is Recognition of the Major Economic Issue of our Time, https://www.tasc.ie/blog/2017/05/15/imfstudy-of-downward-share-of-labour-income-is-re/.

  • Topalova, P. (2007). Trade Liberalization, Poverty and Inequality: Evidence from Indian Districts. NBER Working Paper, www.nber.org/chapters/c0110.

  • Unel, M. B. (2003). Productivity trends in India’s manufacturing sectors in the last two decades. IMF Working Paper No. 03/22, International Monetary Fund; www.imf.org.

  • Yeaple, S. (2005). A simple model of firm heterogeneity, international trade and wages. Journal of International Economics, 65(1), 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, Delhi School of Economics, University of Delhi, New Delhi, India

    Dibyendu Maiti

Authors
  1. Dibyendu Maiti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dibyendu Maiti .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA

    Gary Fields

  2. Asian Development Bank Institute, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan

    Saumik Paul

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Asian Development Bank Institute

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Maiti, D. (2019). Trade, Labor Share, and Productivity in India’s Industries. In: Fields, G., Paul, S. (eds) Labor Income Share in Asia. ADB Institute Series on Development Economics. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7803-4_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation