Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-27T11:25:51.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Foreign Ownership, Microelectronic Technology and Skills: Evidence for British Establishments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 March 2020

Dirk Willem te Velde
Dirk Willem te Velde*
Affiliation:
Overseas Development Institute, III Westminster Bridge Road, London, SEI 7JD
*
e-mails: dw.tevelde@odi.org.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper uses the Workplace Employee Relations Survey panel for 1990–1998 to investigate the relationship between foreign ownership, skill-structure and use of microelectronic technologies in British establishments. We find that foreign-owned establishments are early adopters of new microelectronic technologies and employ more non-manual workers (more senior technical professional workers, less skilled manual workers). Because foreign-owned establishments are early adopters of new technology, an increase in foreign ownership can partly explain a recent improvement in the relative position of skilled workers in Britain.

Type
Articles
Information
National Institute Economic Review , Volume 185 , July 2003 , pp. 93 - 106
Copyright
Copyright © 2003 National Institute of Economic and Social Research

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

∗

I thank Prof. Ron Smith for having supervised this as chapter 5 of my doctoral dissertation at Birkbeck College, an anonymous referee, and former NIESR colleagues for useful comments and suggestions, in particular John Forth, Simon Kirby and Neil Millward for introducing me to the WERS database. I also thank participants at the 2nd Workplace Employee Relations Survey meeting held at NIESR, March 2001 and at the 28th Annual Conference of the European Association for Research in Industrial Economics, August 2001, Dublin. The author acknowledges the Department of Trade and Industry, the Economic and Social Research Council, the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service and the Policy Studies Institute as the originators of the 1998 Workplace Employee Relations Survey data, and the Data Archive at the University of Essex as the distributor of the data. None of these organisations bears any responsibility for the authors analysis and interpretations of the data. Any errors remain mine. Comments can be sent to dw.tevelde@odi.org.uk

References

Bartel, A. and Lichtenberg, F. (1987), ‘The comparative advantage of educated workers in implementing new technology’, Review of Economics and Statistics, 69, pp. 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernard, A.B. and Jensen, J.B. (1997), ‘Exporters, skill upgrading, and the wage gap’, Journal of International Economics, 42, pp. 3–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blanchflower, D. (1984), ‘Comparative pay levels in domestically-owned and foreign-owned manufacturing plants: a comment”, British Journal of Industrial Relations, 22, pp. 265–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blomström, M. and Sjöholm, F. (1999), ‘Technology transfer and spillovers: does local participation with multinationals matter?’, European Economic Review, 43, pp. 915–923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caves, R.E. (1974), ‘Multinational firms, competition, and productivity in host-country markets’, Economica, 41, 162, pp. 176–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cully, M. and Marginson, P. (1995), The Workplace Industrial Relations Surveys: Donovan and the Burden of Continuity, Warwick Papers in Industrial Relations 55, Coventry, Industrial Relations Research Unit.Google Scholar
Davies, S.W. and Lyons, B.R. (1991), ‘Characterising relative performance: the productivity advantage of foreign-owned firms in the UK’, Oxford Economic Papers, 43, pp. 584–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Department of Trade and Industry (1999), Workplace Employee Relations Survey, 1998: Panel Survey 1990-1998 [computer file]. 4th ednColchester: The Data Archive [distributor], 20 December 1999, SN: 4026.Google Scholar
Driffield, N. (1995), ‘Wage rates and labour productivity in the foreign and domestic sectors of British industry: a plant level comparison’, Discussion Paper in Economics, Cardiff Business School, University of Wales.Google Scholar
Dunning, J.H. (1977), ‘Trade, location of economic activity and MNE: a search for an eclectic approach’, in Ohlin, B., Hesselborn, P.O. and Wijkman, P.W. (eds), The International Allocation of Economic Activity, London, Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dunning, J.H. (1993), Multinational Enterprises and the Global Economy, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Forth, J. and Kirby, S. (2000), ‘Guide to the analysis of the workplace employee relations survey 1998 [version 1.1: april 2000]’, Wers98 data dissemination service, National Institute of Economic and Social Research.Google Scholar
Forth, J. and Millward, N. (2001), ‘The low-paid worker and the low-paying employer: characterisations using WERS98’, National Institute Discussion Paper no. 179.Google Scholar
Girma, S., Greenaway, D. and Wakelin, K. (2000), ‘Who benefits from foreign direct investment in the UK’, paper presented at the RES conference in St Andrews, July.Google Scholar
Griffith, R. (1999), ‘Productivity and foreign-ownership in the UK car industry’, Institute for Fiscal Studies Working paper no. 99/11.Google Scholar
Griliches, Z. (1969), ‘Capital-skill complementarity’, Review of Economics and Statistics, 51, pp. 465–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haskel, J. and Heden, Y. (1999), ‘Computers and the demand for skilled labour: industry and establishment panel evidence for the UK’, Economic Journal, 109, pp. 69–79.Google Scholar
Lohr, S.L. (1999), Sampling: Design and Analysis, Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Machin, S. (1996), ‘Changes in the relative demand for skills’, in Booth, A.L. and Snower, D.J. Qcquiring Skills: Market Failures, their Symptoms and Policy Responses, CEPR and Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mansfield, E., Rapoport, J., Romeo, A., Villani, E., Wagner, S. and Husic, F. (1977), The Production and Application of New Industrial Technology, New York, Norton.Google Scholar
Mansfield, E. and Romeo, A. (1980), ‘Technology transfer to overseas subsidiaries by US based firms’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, December, pp. 737–750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markusen, J.R. and Venables, A.T. (1997), ‘The role of multinational firms in the wage-gap debate’, Review of International Economics, 5, 4, pp. 435–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millward, N., Bryson, A. and Forth, J. (2000), All Change at Work? British Employment Relations 1980-1998, as Portrayed by the Workplace Industrial Relations Survey, London, Routledge.Google Scholar
Oulton, N. (1998), ‘Investment, capital and foreign ownership in UK manufacturing’, National Institute of Economic and Social Research Discussion paper no. 141.Google Scholar
Polachek, S.W. and Siebert, W.S. (1993), The Economics of Earnings, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prescott, E.C. (1998), ‘Needed: a theory of total factor productivity’, International Economic Review, 39, pp. 525–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purdon, S. and Pickering, K. (2001), ‘The use of sampling weights in the analysis of the 1998 Workplace Employee Relations Survey”, National Centre for Social Research, presented at 2nd WERS conference and downloadable from http://www.niesr.ac.uk/niesr/wers98.Google Scholar
Teece, D.J. (1977), ‘Technology transfer by multinational firms: the resource cost of transferring technological know-how’, Economic Journal, 87, pp. 242–261.Google Scholar
Velde, D.W. te (2002), ‘Foreign ownership and wages in British establishments’, The Economic and Social Review, 33, pp. 101–108.Google Scholar