Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-78dcdb465f-vzs5b Total loading time: 0.258 Render date: 2021-04-16T01:58:09.663Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

U.S. ELASTICITIES OF SUBSTITUTION AND FACTOR AUGMENTATION AT THE INDUSTRY LEVEL

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 May 2012

Andrew T. Young
Affiliation:
West Virginia University
Corresponding
E-mail address:

Abstract

We provide industry-level estimates of the elasticity of substitution (σ) between capital and labor in the United States. We also estimate rates of factor augmentation. Aggregate estimates are produced. Our empirical model comes from the first-order conditions associated with a constant–elasticity of substitution production function. Our data represent 35 industries at roughly the 2-digit SIC level, 1960–2005. We find that aggregate U.S. σ is likely less than 0.620. σ is likely less than unity for a large majority of individual industries. Evidence also suggests that aggregate σ is less than the value-added share-weighted average of industry σ's. Aggregate technical change appears to be net labor–augmenting. This also appears to be true for the large majority of individual industries, but several industries may be characterized by net capital augmentation. When industry-level elasticity estimates are mapped to model sectors, the manufacturing sector σ is lower than that of services; the investment sector σ is lower than that of consumption.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Acemoglu, Daron A. (2003) Labor- and capital-augmenting technical change. Journal of the European Economic Association 1, 137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altig, David, Auerbach, Alan J., Kotlikoff, Lawrence J., Smetters, Kent A., and Walliser, Jan (2001) Simulating fundamental tax reform in the United States. American Economic Review 91, 574595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Antràs, Pol (2004) Is the US aggregate production function Cobb–Douglas? New estimates of the elasticity of substitution. Contributions to Macroeconomics 4, Article 4.Google Scholar
Arrow, Kenneth J., Chenery, Hollis B., Minhas, Bagicha S., and Solow, Robert M. (1961) Capital–labor substitution and economic efficiency. Review of Economics and Statistics 43, 225250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balisteri, Edward J., McDaniel, Christine A., and Wong, Eina V. (2003) An estimation of US industry-level capital–labor substitution elasticities: Support for –Cobb–Douglas. North American Journal of Economics and Finance 14, 343356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ballard, Charles L., Fullerton, Don, Shoven, John B., and Whalley, John (1985) A General Equilibrium Model for Tax Policy Evaluation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Behrman, Jere R. (1972) Sectoral elasticities of substitution between capital and labor in a developing economy: Time series analysis in the case of postwar Chile. Econometrica 40, 311326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berndt, Ernst R. (1976) Reconciling alternative estimates of the elasticity of substitution. Review of Economics and Statistics 58, 5968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caballero, Ricardo J. (1994) Small sample bias and adjustment costs. Review of Economics and Statistics 76, 5258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caballero, Ricardo J., Engel, Eduardo M. R. A., and Haltiwanger, John C. (1995) Plant-level adjustment and aggregate investment dynamics. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 2, 139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caddy, Vern (1976) Empirical Estimation of the Elasticity of Substitution: A Review. Working paper, Monash University. Available at http://www.monash.edu.au/policy/ftp/workpapr/op-09.pdf.Google Scholar
Chirinko, Robert S. (2002) Corporate taxation, capital formation, and the substitution elasticity between labor and capital. National Tax Journal 55, 339355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chirinko, Robert S. (2008) σ: The long and short of it. Journal of Macroeconomics 30, 671686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chirinko, Robert S., Fazzari, Steven M., and Meyer, Andrew P. (2007) That Elusive Elasticity: A Long-Panel Approach to Estimating the Price Sensitivity of Business Capital. Working paper, Emory University.Google Scholar
de La Grandville, Olivier (1989) In search of the Slutsky diamond. American Economic Review 79, 468481.Google Scholar
de La Grandville, Olivier and Solow, Robert M. (2006) A conjecture on general means. Journal of Inequalities in Pure and Applied Mathematics 7, article 3.Google Scholar
Diamond, Peter, McFadden, Daniel M., and Rodriguez, Miguel (1978) Measurement of the elasticity of substitution and bias of technical change. In Fuss, M. and Fadden, D.M. (eds.), Production Economics, Vol. 2. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
Eisner, Robert, and Nadiri, M. Ishaq (1968) Investment behavior and the neo-classical theory. Review of Economics and Statistics 50, 369382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engen, Eric, Gravelle, Jane, and Smetters, Kent (1997) Dynamic tax models: Why they do the things they do. National Tax Journal 50, 657682.Google Scholar
Fair, Ray C. (1970) The estimation of simultaneous equation models with lagged endogenous variables and first order serially correlated errors. Econometrica 38, 507516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, Rorbert E. and Jorgenson, Dale W. (1971) Application of the theory of optimal capital accumulation. In Fromm, Gary (ed.), Tax Incentives and Capital Spending. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Harberger, Arnold C. (1959) The corporate income tax: An empirical assessment. In Tax Revision Compendium 1. Washington, DC: House Committee on Ways and Means, 86th Congress, First Session, 231250.Google Scholar
Ho, Mun S. and Jorgenson, Dale W. (1999) The Quality of the U.S. Workforce, 1948–95. Manuscript, Harvard University.Google Scholar
Hsieh, Chang-Tai and Klenow, Peter J. (2009) Misallocation and manufacturing TFP in China and India. Quarterly Journal of Economics 124, 14031448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johansen, Søren (1995) Likelihood-Based Inference in Cointegrated Vector Autoregressive Models. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johansen, Søren and Juselius, Katarina (1990) Maximum likelihood estimation and inference on cointegration – With applications to the demand for money. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 52, 169210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Charles I. and Scrimgeour, Dean (2008) A new proof of Uzawa's steady-state growth theorem. Review of Economics and Statistics 90, 180182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Ronald W. (1965) The structure of simple general equilibrium models. Journal of Political Economy 73, 557572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jorgenson, Dale W. (1963) Capital theory and investment behavior. American Economic Review 53, 247259.Google Scholar
Jorgenson, Dale W., Gollop, Frank M., and Fraumeini, Barbara (1987) Productivity and US Economic Growth. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Jorgenson, Dale W. and Yun, Kun-Young (2001) Lifting the Burden: Tax Reform, the Cost of Capital, and US Economic Growth. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Klump, Rainier and de La Grandville, Olivier (2000) Economic growth and the elasticity of substitution: two theorems and some suggestions. American Economic Review 90, 282291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klump, Rainier, McAdam, Peter, and Willman, Alpo (2007) Factor substitution and factor-augmenting technical progress in the United States: A normalized supply-side system approach. Review of Economics and Statistics 89, 183192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klump, Rainier, McAdam, Peter, and Willman, Alpo (2008) Unwrapping the Euro area growth puzzles: Factor substitution, productivity and unemployment. Journal of Macroeconomics 30, 645666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klump, Rainier and Preissler, Harald (2000) CES production functions and economic growth. Scandinavian Journal of Economics 102, 4156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
León-Ledesma, Miguel A., McAdam, Peter, and Willman, Alpo (2010) Identifying the elasticity of substitution with biased technical change. American Economic Review 100, 13301357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucas, Robert E. Jr., (1969) Labor–capital substitution in US manufacturing. In Harberger, Arnold C. and Bailey, Martin J. (eds.), The Taxation of Income from Capital. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Miyagiwa, Kaz (2008) Comment on “The endogenous aggregate elasticity of substitution for a small open economy.” Journal of Macroeconomics 30, 641644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miyagiwa, Kaz and Papageorgiou, Chris (2007) Endogenous aggregate elasticity of substitution. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 31, 28992919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakamura, Hideki and Nakamura, Masakatsu (2008) Constant-elasticity-of-substitution production function. Macroeconomic Dynamics 12, 694701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nishimura, Kazuo and Venditti, Alain (2004) Indeterminacy and the role of factor substitutability. Macroeconomic Dynamics 8, 436465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palivos, Theodore and Karagiannis, Giannis (2010) The elasticity of substitution as an engine of growth. Macroeconomic Dynamics 14, 617628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Restuccia, Diego and Rogerson, Richard (2008) Policy distortions and aggregate productivity with heterogeneous plants. Review of Economic Dynamics 11, 707720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roeger, Werner, Veld, Jan in't, and Woehrmann, Don I. Asoka (2002) Some equity and efficiency considerations of international tax competition. International Tax and Public Finance 9, 731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solow, Robert M. (1964) Capital, labor and income in manufacturing. In The Behavior of Income Shares: Selected Theoretical and Empirical Issues. Princeton, NJ: NBER.Google Scholar
Temple, John R.W. (2009) The calibration of CES production functions. Working paper, University of Bristol. Available at http://www.efm.bris.ac.uk/ecjrwt/abstracts/normalizingces21.pdf.Google Scholar
Uzawa, Hirofumi (1961) Neutral inventions and the stability of growth equilibrium. Review of Economic Studies 28, 117124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valentinyi, Ákos and Herrendorf, Berthold (2008) Measuring factor income shares at the sectoral level. Review of Economic Dynamics 11, 820835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 224 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 16th April 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

U.S. ELASTICITIES OF SUBSTITUTION AND FACTOR AUGMENTATION AT THE INDUSTRY LEVEL
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

U.S. ELASTICITIES OF SUBSTITUTION AND FACTOR AUGMENTATION AT THE INDUSTRY LEVEL
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

U.S. ELASTICITIES OF SUBSTITUTION AND FACTOR AUGMENTATION AT THE INDUSTRY LEVEL
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *