Industrial organisation

Jan Hanousek, Anna Kochanova, 04 May 2015

The evidence about the effect of bribery on economic growth is mixed. Some find it harmful while others believe it helps via a ‘grease the wheels’ effect. This column argues that the ambiguity can be explained by divergent effects of the mean and dispersion of corruption. A high bribery-mean retards productivity growth of firms, but a high bribery-dispersion facilitates performance of weak firms.

Gregory Crawford, Nicola Pavanini, Fabiano Schivardi, 30 April 2015

Many studies argue that asymmetric information plays a key role in lending markets. This column presents new evidence on asymmetric information and imperfect competition on the Italian lending market. An increase in adverse selection causes most of the prices in the sample to increase, most of the quantities to fall, and most of the defaults to rise. However, there is substantial heterogeneity in the response to a rise in adverse selection. Market power could be an explanation why some markets can absorb such shocks better than others. 

Eric Bartelsman, Filippo di Mauro, Ettore Dorrucci, 17 March 2015

The shallow growth response to Eurozone rebalancing policies could point towards structural impediments. To uncover such impediments and design effective structural reforms, it is necessary to focus on the path from micro behaviour to macro outcomes. This column argues that firm-level data from the CompNet database can shed light on the impacts of structural reforms. 

Kristian Behrens, Théophile Bougna, Mark Brown, 05 March 2015

Transport costs fell precipitously during the last century leading many observers to posit that the world has ‘become flat’. If this were true, the costs of transporting goods should no longer have much bearing on firms’ location choices and the spatial structure of economic activity. This column, using manufacturing data for Canada from 1990 to 2008, argues that despite a decline in geographical concentration of industries, location patterns still change with fluctuations in transport costs.

Oriana Bandiera, Andrea Prat, Raffaella Sadun, 12 February 2015

The hypothesis that family firms are good for growth has come under scrutiny in recent years. This paper presents novel evidence on fundamental differences in behaviour between family and professional CEOs. Family managers tend to work at least 9% less than non-family ones, which is driven by their preferences for leisure and work. Family CEOs are typically wealthier and thus increase their consumption of leisure, which is a normal good. However, this behaviour may have adverse effects on family owned firms since hours worked by CEOs are strongly related with productivity. Given the ubiquity of family-run firms, this can impact the entire economy.

Other Recent Articles: