Characteristics of foreign-owned firms in British manufacturing

By Rachel Griffith, Helen Simpson. 2001

180 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/233761bcd463c2e7b914e0c42be2e57f18c269c7

Citations in the corpus

• Gifted kids or pushy parents? Foreign acquisitions and plant performance in Indonesia (2005, unknown): “Evidence of a positive correlation of this measure with foreign ownership has been presented by Haddad and Harrison (1993) for Morocco, Griffith and Simpson (2001) for the UK and Girma et al. (2004) for Ireland.”
• Evaluating the Foreign Ownership Wage Premium Using a Difference-in-Differences Matching Approach (2006, unknown): “First, foreign-owned firms are important players in both sectors, accounting for about 19 percent of employment in electronics and 10 percent of employment in the food industry in 1996 (see Griffith and Simpson, 2003, Table 4).”
• Absorptive capacity and productivity spillovers From FDI: a threshold regression analysis (2005, unknown): “The evidence for a productivity differential between foreign and domestic firms in favour of MNCs appears to be convincing (cf. Griffith and Simpson, 2002 and Girma et al., 2001).”
• Innovation, employment growth, and foreign ownership of firms (2014, unknown): “There is ample evidence that multinational enterprises (MNEs) tend to possess superior firm-specific assets, operate more frequently in R&Dintensive sectors and employ more highly-qualified staff than domestically owned firms (Bellak, 2004; Griffith and Simpson, 2004; Markusen, 2002).”
• Domestic versus cross-border acquisitions: which impact on the target firms’ performance? (2008, unknown): “7 For instance, in the UK market, Davies and Lyons (1991), Driffield (1977), Girma et al. (2000) or Griffith and Simpson (2001) confirmed the productivity superiority of foreign-owned firms.”
• Foreign Ownership and Productivity in the United Kingdom Estimates for U.K. Manufacturing Using the ARD (2003, unknown): “This is especially important as Griffith (1999) and Griffith and Simpson (2000) have used comparable ARD data that appears to suggest that while the foreign-owned sector has higher output-per-worker, this can be explained by higher capital-per-worker in these plants (and this is often argued to be…”
• Why Do Foreign-Owned Firms Pay More? The Role of On-the-Job Training (2007, unknown): “(1996) and Feliciano and Lipsey (2006) for the United States, Globerman et al. (1994) for Canada, and Griffith and Simpson (2004) for the United Kingdom.”
• Linking FDI motivation and host economy productivity effects: conceptual and empirical analysis (2007, unknown): “Indeed, recent applied work in this area attempting to characterise ownership advantages in a given location suggests that new technology and quality of the capital stock are key variables (see, for example, Griffith, 1999; Griffith and Simpson 2001; Oulton, 2001; Criscuolo and Martin, 2004).”
• Foreign Direct Investment, Spillovers and Absorptive Capacity: Evidence from Quantile Regressions (2005, unknown): “As Griffith and Simpson (2004, Table 4) show, employment in foreign-owned establishments accounted for almost 19 percent of total employment in the electronics sector, and around 15 percent in the engineering sector in 1996.”
• Corporate income tax reforms and international tax competition (2002, unknown): “Griffith and Simpson (2001) show that the proportion of investment in physical assets in the UK production sector”
• Multinationals and U.S. Productivity Leadership: Evidence from Great Britain (2009, unknown): “In terms of the latter, we include in equation 2 average wages as a proxy for the average skill level of workers; in contrast to other studies (e.g. Griffith and Simpson (2001)) we cannot further distinguish between operatives’ and administrative employees’ average wages because this information…”
• Labor Markets and the Demand for Foreign Direct Investment (2010, unknown): “…of FDI’s effects on skilled wages proxy for skilled labor by using wage data for nonproduction workers employed in manufacturing industries+ 26+ See Griffith and Simpson 2001; and Griffith 1999+ 27+ Feenstra and Hanson 1997+ 28+ See Mayda and Rodrik 2005; and O’Rourke and Sinnott 2001+ Labor…”
• Analysis of Productivity Differences among Foreign and Domestic Firms: Evidence from Germany (2008, unknown): “Griffith and Simpson (2004) extend this analysis by taking into account all UK manufacturing industries over the period 1980‐1996.”
• How Domestic and Foreign Firms Differ and Why Does it Matter (2004, unknown): “Griffith and Simpson (2000) – building on Griffith (1999a,b) – extend the analysis to the total manufacturing sector, dividing FO firms into 'always FO' and into 'FO taken over' (changing ownership).”
• Wage inequality and the role of multinationals: evidence from UK panel data (2005, unknown): “…of technological advantages, which generate productivity differences between foreign and domestic firms (Cantwell, 1991; Davies and Lyons, 1991; Griffith and Simpson, 2001; and Driffield and Taylor, 2001) and consequently differences in profitability between foreign and domestic firms, see…”