Abstract
This article reviews the literature on value added distribution in a long-run perspective. In so doing, it discusses: (i) the measure of the labor and capital shares; (ii) the set of explanation behind the evolution of those ratios, whether this is due to labor and capital substitution effect, the automation and creation of new tasks, and the evolution of firms market power and markup; (iii) the consequences on inequalities, growth, and welfare. In all cases, historical series are used to enlighten the issue while historical events are proposed to document-specific mechanisms at work.
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
See Appendix A.3 for the intermediate steps.
- 3.
Namely Austria, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
- 4.
The five instruments in question are military purchases of equipment, vessels, and software plus military R&D spending, and the oil price.
- 5.
Notice that the studies following Barkai’s approach are based on value-added.
Bibliography
Acemoglu D (2002) Directed technical change. Rev Econ Stud 69(4):781–810
Acemoglu D (2003) Labor and capital-augmenting technical change. J Eur Econ Assoc 1(1):1–37
Acemoglu D, Restrepo P (2018) The race between man and machine: implications of technology for growth, factor shares, and employment. Am Econ Rev 108(6):1488–1515
Acemoglu D, Restrepo P (2019) Automation and new tasks: how technology displaces and reinstates labor. J Econ Perspect 33(2):3–30
Ackerberg DA, Caves K, Frazer G (2015) Identification properties of recent production function estimators. Econometrica 83:2411–2451
Aghion P, Howitt P (1992) A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica 60(2):323–351
Aghion P, Bloom P, Blundell R, Griffith R, Howitt P (2005) Competition and innovation: an inverted-U relationship. Q J Econ 120(2):701–728
Allen R (2009) The British Industrial Revolution in global perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Autor D, Dorn D, Katz LF, Patterson C, Van Reenen J (2020) The fall of the labor share and the rise of the superstar firms. Q J Econ 135(2):645–709
Barkai S (2020) Declining labor and capital shares. J Financ 75(5):2421–2463
Barkai S, Benzell SG (2017) 70 years of US corporate profits. New working paper series n 22; Stigler Center
Basu S (2019) Are price-costs markups rising in the United States? A discussion of the evidence. J Econ Perspect 33(3):3–22
Bengtsson E, Waldenström D (2018) Capital shares and income inequality: evidence from the Long Run. J Econ Hist 78(3):712–743
Bengtsson E, Rubolino E, WaldenstrÃűm D (2020) What determines the capital share over the long run of history? IZA DP No. 13199
Bentolila S, Saint-Paul G (2003) Explaining movements in the labor share. BE J Macroecon 3(1):1–33
Bergeaud A, Cette G, Lecat R (2018) Productivity trends in advanced countries between 1890 and 2012. Rev Income Wealth 62(3):420–444
Budd EC (1960) Factor shares, 1850–1910. In: NBER (ed) Trends in the American Economy in the nineteenth century. Princeton University Press
Caballero RJ, Fahri E, Gourinchas PO (2017) Rents, technical change, and risk premia accounting for secular trends in interest rates, returns on capital, earning yields, and factor shares. Am Econ Rev 107(5):614–620
Cette G, Koehl L, Philippon T (2019) La part du travail sur le long terme: un dÃl’clin ? Economie et Statistique / Economics and Statistics 510–512:35–51
Cobb CW, Douglas PH (1928) A theory of production. Am Econ Rev 18(1):139–165
Dao M, Das M, Koczan Z, Lian W (2019) Why is labor receiving a smaller share of global income? Econ Policy 34(100):723–759
De Loecker J, Eeckhout J, Unger G (2020) The rise of market power and the macroeconomic implications. Q J Econ 135(2):561–644
de Pleijt A, Nuvolari A, Weisdorf J (2020) Human capital formation during the first Industrial Revolution: evidence from the use of steam engines. J Eur Econ Assoc 18(2):829–889
Doraszelski U, Jaumandreu J (2018) Measuring the bias of technical change. J Polit Econ 126(5):1027–1084
Elsby MWL, Hobijn B, Sahin A (2013) The decline of the U.S. labor share. Brook Pap Econ Act 44(2):1–52
Foster L, Haltiwanger J, Tuttle C (2022) Rising markups or changing technology? NBER Working Paper 30491
Goldin C, Katz LF (2008) The race between education and technology. Belknap Press, Harvard
Gutiérrez G (2017) Investigating global labor and profit shares. 2017 mimeo
Guitérrez G, Philippon T (2017a) Declining competition and investment in the U.S. NBER Working Paper: 23583
Guitérrez G, Philippon T (2017b) Investment-less growth: an empirical investigation. Brook Pap Econ Act 48(3):89–169
Guitérrez G, Philippon T (2023) How European markets become free: a study of institutional drift. J Eur Assoc 21(1):251–292
Habakkuk HJ (1962) American and British technology in the nineteenth century. Cambridge University Press, London
Hall RE (2018) New evidence on market power, profit, concentration, and the role of mega-firms in the US economy. 2018 mimeo
Hall RE, Jorgenson DE (1967) Tax policy and investment behavior. Am Econ Rev 57(3):391–414
Hulten CR (1992) Growth accounting when technical change is embodied in capital. Am Econ Rev 82(4):964–980
Jordá O, Knoll K, Kuvshinov D, Schularick M, Taylor AM (2019) The rate of return on everything, 1870–2015. Q J Econ 134(3):1225–1298
Jorgenson DE (1963) Capital theory and investment behavior. Am Econ Rev 53(2):247–259
Karabarbounis L, Neiman B (2014) The global decline of the labor share. Q J Econ 129(1):61–103
Karabarbounis L, Neiman B (2018) Accounting for factorless income. NBER Macroecon Annu 33:167–228
Keynes JM (1939) Relative movements of real wages and output. Econ J 49(193):34–51
Knoblach M, Roessler M, Zwerschke P (2020) The elasticity of substitution between capital and labour in the US economy: a meta-regression analysis. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 82(1):62–82
Mehra R, Prescott EC (1985) The equity premium: a puzzle. J Monet Econ 15(2):145–161
Muck J, McAdam P, Growiec J (2018) Will the “true” labor share stand up? An applied survey on labor share measures. J Econ Surv 32(4):961–984
North D, Weingast B (1989) Constitutions and commitment: the evolution of institutions governing public choice in seventeenth-century England. J Econ Hist 49(4):803–832
Olley GS, Pakes A (1996) The dynamics of productivity in the telecommunications equipment industry. Econometrica 64(6):1263–1297
Olmstead A, Rhode P (2001) Reshaping the landscape: the impact and diffusion of the tractor in American agriculture, 1910–1960. J Econ Hist 61(3):663–698
Philippon T (2019) The great reversal: how America gave up on free markets. Harvard University Press, Harvard
Piketty (2013) Le capital au XXIème siècle. Seuil, Paris
Piketty T, Zucman G (2014) Capital is back: wealth-income ratios in rich countries, 1700–2010. Q J Econ 129(3):1155–1210
Pomeranz K (2000) The great divergence: China, Europe, and the making of the modern world economy. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Rasmussen WD (1982) The mechanization of agriculture. Sci Am 247(3):76–89
Schwellnus C, Geva A, Pak M, Veiel R (2019) Gig economy platforms: boone or bane? OECD 2019; Economics Department Working Paper 1550
Solow RM (1957) Technical change and the aggregate production function. Rev Econ Stat 39(3):312–320
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix
Appendix
Production Function and Elasticity of Substitution Value
Recall (4) and set \( \rho =\frac{\sigma -1}{\sigma } \). This gives:
The Cobb-Douglas case: ρ → 0
Applying a monotonic (log) transformation to our production function gives:
Remembering that, in a Cobb-Douglas function, the elasticity of substitution is 1, it can be approached by the limit of our CES when ρ tends toward 0:
Which leads us to the undetermined form \( \frac{0}{0} \). By L’Hôpital’s rule:
Applying the inverse transformation operated in (21), we get the standard Cobb-Douglas production function:
The Leontieff case: ρ → −∞
Starting from (21), and remembering that the elasticity of substitution in a Leontieff function is 0, the limit of our CES, when ρ tends to −∞ gives:
Which is again an undetermined form \( \frac{\infty }{\infty } \). Then by L’hôpital’s rule:
When AKK > ALL, \( \underset{\rho \to -\infty }{\lim }{\left(\frac{A_KK}{A_LL}\right)}^{\rho }=0 \), and \( \underset{\rho \to -\infty }{\lim}\ln (Y)=\ln \left({A}_LL\right) \). On the contrary, if AKK < ALL, \( \underset{\rho \to -\infty }{\lim }{\left(\frac{A_KK}{A_LL}\right)}^{\rho }=+\infty \), and \( \underset{\rho \to -\infty }{\lim}\;\ln (Y)=\ln \left({A}_KK\right) \). In a nutshell:
Cost-minimization Problem
Assuming the aggregate production function is (4), and taking a potential markup in the economy, the cost-minimization problem is:
Where C(Y) is the aggregate total cost in the economy, and the price P is the numeraire, such that PY = Y. By defining the following Lagrangian function:
where λ is the Lagrange multiplier, the first-order conditions lead to:
By the Envelope theorem, we have:
Equation (28) shows that the Lagrange multiplier can be interpreted as the rate at which the optimal value of total costs (C(Y)) changes with respect to changes in the quantities produced (Y). In other words, λ are the marginal costs. Recording that the markup of price over marginal costs is the price divided by the marginal cost:
and that P = 1, there is a direct link between the Lagrange multiplier (λ) and the markup (μ):
Accordingly, we can rewrite Eqs. (25) and (26) as (7) and (8).
Factor Shares Derivation
For the labor share:
For the capital share:
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature
About this entry
Cite this entry
Bazot, G., Guerreiro, D. (2023). Labor Share, Capital Share, and Rents: A Macrohistorical Perspective. In: Diebolt, C., Haupert, M. (eds) Handbook of Cliometrics. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40458-0_95-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40458-0_95-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-40458-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-40458-0
eBook Packages: Springer Reference Economics and FinanceReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences