scholarly journals Consumption Network Effects

2019 ◽  
Vol 87 (1) ◽  
pp. 130-163 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giacomo De Giorgi ◽  
Anders Frederiksen ◽  
Luigi Pistaferri

Abstract In this article we study consumption network effects. Does the consumption of our peers affect our own consumption? How large is such effect? What are the economic mechanisms behind it? We use administrative panel data on Danish households to construct a measure of consumption based on tax records on income and assets. We combine tax record data with matched employer–employee data to identify peer groups based on workplace, which gives us a much tighter and credible definition of networks than used in previous literature. We use the non-overlapping network structure of one’s peers group, as well as firm-level shocks, to build valid instruments for peer consumption. We estimate non-negligible and statistically significant network effects, capable of generating sizable multiplier effect at the macro-level. We also investigate what mechanisms generate such effects, distinguishing between intertemporal and intratemporal consumption effects as well as a more traditional risk sharing view.

2008 ◽  
Vol 228 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dirk Engel ◽  
Michaela Trax

SummaryStatements emphasizing the major contribution of the small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) for net job creation are quite frequent. Concerning the current definition of SMEs provided by the European Commission (EC), this paper makes a first attempt to approximate SMEs’ contribution to net employment change based on the IAB-Establishment Panel Data over the years 1998 to 2005 for the whole private economy. Due to sufficient data, independent one-plant firms with less than 250 employees may approximate the group of SMEs according at best. Comparisons with the firm-level Amadeus database validate the suitability of the IAB-establishment panel data for calculation of the SMEs’ employment share, as long as one controls for the establishments’ independence status. The employment share lies about fifty percent. As a matter of fact, the employment share of affiliated SMEs increases over time. Furthermore, independent small plants do not show higher net employment change rates than neither affiliated plants nor middle-sized and large plants. The results reinforce once again the impression that empirical evidence for the assumed superiority of SMEs, is very weak. Further research should mention the role of ownership and firms venturing on the level of firm as well as for the economy at all in more detail.


1992 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 243-251
Author(s):  
JASON G. CUMMINS ◽  
KEVIN A. HASSETT
Keyword(s):  

World Economy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benoît Mahy ◽  
François Rycx ◽  
Guillaume Vermeylen ◽  
Mélanie Volral
Keyword(s):  

2000 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 23-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik Brynjolfsson ◽  
Lorin M Hitt

To understand the economic value of computers, one must broaden the traditional definition of both the technology and its effects. Case studies and firm-level econometric evidence suggest that: 1) organizational “investments” have a large influence on the value of IT investments; and 2) the benefits of IT investment are often intangible and disproportionately difficult to measure. Our analysis suggests that the link between IT and increased productivity emerged well before the recent surge in the aggregate productivity statistics and that the current macroeconomic productivity revival may in part reflect the contributions of intangible capital accumulated in the past.


2014 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 1577 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kun Su ◽  
Rui Wan

<p>Using a firm-level panel data of Chinese listed firms, this paper examines the effects of state control on firm value and the different impacts that have under different degree of marketization deeply. The results show: compared with non-state controlled firms, state controlled firms are imposed by much policy burden and have more serious tunneling or expropriation behaviors. Therefore, firm values in state controlled firms are lower than in non-state controlled firms. For state controlled firms, the lower the government administrative ranks, the more serious the intervention or expropriation behaviors imposed by government, and thus the lower the firm value. Compared with low marketization regions, the negative effects of state control and low government administrative rank control on firm value is relatively smaller in regions with high degree of marketization.</p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document