Industrial Structure and Aggregate Growth

By M. Peneder. 2003

470 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fb2a49e06f5ac1de392d245e3f49568eb2265850

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

Citations in the corpus

The EU 2020 Innovation Indicator: A Step Forward in Measuring Innovation Outputs and Outcomes? (2017, background): “High shares of knowledge-intensive sectors have been shown to be associated with GDP levels and growth (e.g. Peneder, 2003), so policy-wise the second group of countries should clearly be very worried.”
Determinants of total factor productivity : a literature review (2007, background): “…also experienced higher aggregate productivity growth because the sector was very productive and there were major spillover effects to other industries.21 Peneder (2003) estimates the impact of industrial structure on aggregate income and growth for some 28 OECD countries over the period 1985-1998.”
The determinants of regional specialisation in business services: agglomeration economies, vertical linkages and innovation (2015, background): “…in an increasing number of attempts to identify, conceptually and empirically, its determinants and impact on aggregate economic growth (see Peneder, 2003; Peneder et al., 2003; Parrinello, 2004; Savona and Lorentz, 2005; Schettkat and Yocarini, 2006; Montresor and Vittucci, 2011, among…”
Why does the effect of new business formation differ across regions? (2011, background): “In order to account for the influence of industry structure on employment growth (Glaeser et al. 1992; Peneder 2002; Combes 2000), we also included the employment shares of 27 out of 28 aggregated private industries into our model.”
Surveying structural change: Seminal contributions and a bibliometric account (2008, methodology): “…leading industries to aggregate productivity growth has been assessed using both purely descriptive techniques, such as shift-share analysis (e.g., Fagerberg, 2000; Timmer and Szirmai, 2000; Peneder, 2003), and econometric estimation methods (e.g., Amable, 2000; Fagerberg, 2000; Peneder, 2003).”
Technology clubs, technology gaps and growth trajectories (2008, background): “These results confirm the important role of structural change for economic growth (Fagerberg and Verspagen, 2002; Peneder, 2003), and indicate that the upgrade and transformation of the industrial structure is a”
Is growth of services an obstacle to productivity growth? A comparative analysis (2009, result): “Although the results are largely consistent with other contributions in the literature at a more aggregate level (Van Ark, 1995; Peneder, 2003; Havlik, 2005), the examination of individual contributions through diverse branches of the services industry provides some interesting details.”
Productivity and Structural Change: A Review of the Literature (2008, methodology): “Applications of decomposition formulae to industry-level data are reported in Fagerberg (2000), Peneder (2003) and Krüger (2006a).24 Fagerberg (2000) investigates a data set for 24 manufacturing industries in 39 countries during the period 1973–1990.”