12.07.2015 Views

Trade Adjustment Costs in Developing Countries: - World Bank ...

Trade Adjustment Costs in Developing Countries: - World Bank ...

Trade Adjustment Costs in Developing Countries: - World Bank ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

<strong>Trade</strong> Reform, Employment Allocation and Worker Flows 111<strong>in</strong>dustries have lower than average tariffs. Comparative-advantage <strong>in</strong>dustries alsoexhibit lower import penetration. Firms <strong>in</strong> the top comparative-advantage<strong>in</strong>dustries and exporters have larger workforces than average (85 and 326 workersmore, respectively, than the average formal-sector manufactur<strong>in</strong>g plant with 257workers). The sample from RAIS is a random draw of workers from the formalsector worker universe, so that larger plants are over-represented. Manufactur<strong>in</strong>gemployment drops between 1990 and 1998, and drops faster than average <strong>in</strong> thehighest qu<strong>in</strong>tile advantage sectors.Table 7.3: RAIS summary statistics for manufactur<strong>in</strong>gAll sectors and firms5th comp.adv. Qu<strong>in</strong>tile ExporterMean Std.Dev. Mean Mean(1) (2) (3) (4)OutcomesIndic.: Separation .282 .450 .314 .260Quit .026 .160 .031 .020Indic.: Accession .292 .455 .326 .237Ma<strong>in</strong> covariatesBalassa (1965) Comp. Adv. 1.450 1.047 3.223 1.373Exporter Status .495 .500 .439 1.000Product Market Tariff .193 .103 .174 .204Intm. Input Tariff .146 .077 .105 .154Import Penetration .064 .052 .031 .074Plant-level covariatesLog Employment 5.148 1.952 5.551 6.210Log Employment 1998/90 .930 .919 .976Log Labor Productivity 11.186 .706 11.081 11.233Log Labor Productivity 1998/90 1.045 1.025 1.047Sources: Menezes-Filho and Muendler (2007). RAIS 1990–98 (1-percent random estimation sample),male workers nationwide, 25 to 64 years old, with manufactur<strong>in</strong>g job.Note: Statistics based on separation sample, except for accession <strong>in</strong>dicator (146,787 observations <strong>in</strong>separation, 112,974 <strong>in</strong> accession sample). Sector <strong>in</strong>formation at subsector IBGE level. PIA 1986–98for labor productivity <strong>in</strong>formation.To obta<strong>in</strong> labor productivity, a random extract and three-firm aggregate of themanufactur<strong>in</strong>g firm survey PIA is used (see Appendix B). There are remarkablemean differences <strong>in</strong> labor productivity between an exporter and an average firm.A reason is that substantial employer heterogeneity prevails with<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>dustries,with diverse exporters and nonexporters hav<strong>in</strong>g shift<strong>in</strong>g mean characteristics.Labor productivity <strong>in</strong>creases between 1990 and 1998. At exporters, laborproductivity is higher than average over the whole sample period, but lower thanaverage at firms <strong>in</strong> comparative-advantage <strong>in</strong>dustries. Log labor productivity <strong>in</strong>1998 exceeds log labor productivity <strong>in</strong> 1990 by 4.5 per cent <strong>in</strong> the estimationsample, and by 4.7 per cent at manufactur<strong>in</strong>g exporters.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!