Productivity Performance in Indonesia's Manufacturing Sector
Relying on firm-level data from Statistik Industri this note analyzes the evolution of productivity dynamics of Indonesian firms over the past 20 years (1990-2009). Economy-wide and sectoral productivity changes are decomposed into their two main components: changes due to the evolution of average productivity and changes due to 'allocative efficiency'. This decomposition shows that while during the 20 years both components have increased, the changes in allocative efficiency have been mainly driven by average productivity growth and less by increases in allocative efficiency, even if the latter has also improved during the period under analysis. Interestingly, the note shows that both average Total Factor Productivity (TFP) growth and allocative efficiency improvements are especially driven by a few sectors: electronics, machinery and instruments, and textiles, clothing and footwear. Limited improvements in both allocative efficiency and average TFP have occurred instead in natural-resource-based sectors, sectors characterized by more limited competition and higher rents. This note emphasizes the importance of 'allocative efficiency' for productivity evolution because, in a context where firms are very different in their productivity, it becomes crucial how resources are allocated in the economy. This series of policy notes suggests that regulatory reforms, exposure to foreign competition and access to imported intermediate inputs are important determinants of allocative efficiency. The problem of a 'missing middle' is closely related to that of sub-optimal allocation of resources across firms: a strong feature of Indonesian firm-size distribution. Going further, the note suggests that burdensome regulations and imperfect financial markets are two important causes of this missing middle. To complement the focus on productivity, the note also analyzes firm-level job dynamics and points to the crucial role of 'start-ups' and new companies as a key driver of job creation. This finding suggests that the focus of policymakers on Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) may be misplaced and that this focus should start realigning towards supporting more dynamic 'start-ups' rather than SMEs.
| Summary: | Relying on firm-level data from Statistik Industri this note analyzes the evolution of productivity dynamics of Indonesian firms over the past 20 years (1990-2009). Economy-wide and sectoral productivity changes are decomposed into their two main components: changes due to the evolution of average productivity and changes due to 'allocative efficiency'. This decomposition shows that while during the 20 years both components have increased, the changes in allocative efficiency have been mainly driven by average productivity growth and less by increases in allocative efficiency, even if the latter has also improved during the period under analysis. Interestingly, the note shows that both average Total Factor Productivity (TFP) growth and allocative efficiency improvements are especially driven by a few sectors: electronics, machinery and instruments, and textiles, clothing and footwear. Limited improvements in both allocative efficiency and average TFP have occurred instead in natural-resource-based sectors, sectors characterized by more limited competition and higher rents. This note emphasizes the importance of 'allocative efficiency' for productivity evolution because, in a context where firms are very different in their productivity, it becomes crucial how resources are allocated in the economy. This series of policy notes suggests that regulatory reforms, exposure to foreign competition and access to imported intermediate inputs are important determinants of allocative efficiency. The problem of a 'missing middle' is closely related to that of sub-optimal allocation of resources across firms: a strong feature of Indonesian firm-size distribution. Going further, the note suggests that burdensome regulations and imperfect financial markets are two important causes of this missing middle. To complement the focus on productivity, the note also analyzes firm-level job dynamics and points to the crucial role of 'start-ups' and new companies as a key driver of job creation. This finding suggests that the focus of policymakers on Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) may be misplaced and that this focus should start realigning towards supporting more dynamic 'start-ups' rather than SMEs. |
|---|