116 records from EconBiz based on author Name

1. Economies of scope and relational contracts : exploring global value chains in the automotive industry

Helper, Susan; Munasib, Abdul;
2022
Type: Graue Literatur; Non-commercial literature; Arbeitspapier; Working Paper;
Availability: Link

---

2. Special issue: mobility, climate change, and economic inequality

Stevens, Merieke; Helper, Susan; Keith, David R.; Holguín-Veras, José;
2023
Type: Aufsatzsammlung; Beiträge ; Einzelbeiträge; Sammelwerk ; Graue Literatur; Non-commercial literature;
Availability: Link Link

---

3. The interplay between data-driven decision-making and digitalization : a firm-level survey of the Italian and U.S. automotive industries

Colombari, Ruggero; Geuna, Aldo; Helper, Susan; Martins, Raphael; Paolucci, Emilio; Ricci, Riccaerdo; Seams, Robert;
2023
Type: Aufsatz in Zeitschrift; Article in journal;
Availability: Link
Citations: 4 (based on OpenCitations) Cited By

---

4. Supplier Relations and Adoption of New Technology : Results of Survey Research in the U.S. Auto Industry

abstract

Using an original data source, this paper investigates the circumstances under which firms adopt computer numerical control (CNC), an important type of flexible automation which can significantly increase productivity, product variety and quality. The paper shows that arms'-length supplier/customer relationships are a significant barrier to CNC adoption, even where CNC would improve efficiency. For firms where CNC would be efficient, but who currently receive little commitment from their customers, an increase in contract length of one year would increase the adoption rate by 30%. These results have theoretical implications in two areas. First, the paper integrates questions of appropriability into the technical change literature, by adding supplier relations as a determinant of technology adoption. Second, the paper extends transaction-cost analysis, by relaxing the assumption that agents' private maximizing behavior will always produce organizational forms that maximize social efficiency

Helper, Susan;
2021
Availability: Link

---

5. Why Does Manufacturing Matter? Which Manufacturing Matters? A Policy Framework

abstract

Manufacturing matters to the United States because it provides high-wage jobs, commercial innovation (the nation’s largest source), a key to trade deficit reduction, and a disproportionately large contribution to environmental sustainability. The manufacturing industries and firms that make the greatest contribution to these four objectives are also those that have the greatest potential to maintain or expand employment in the United States. Computers and electronics, chemicals (including pharmaceuticals), transportation equipment (including aerospace and motor vehicles and parts), and machinery are especially important. Productivity and wages vary greatly within as well as between industries. In any industry, manufacturers that are not already at the top have room to improve their performance by adopting “high-road” production, in which skilled workers make innovative products that provide value for consumers and profits for owners. American manufacturing will not realize its potential automatically. While U.S. manufacturing performs well compared to the rest of the U.S. economy, it performs poorly compared to manufacturing in other high-wage countries. American manufacturing needs strengthening in four key areas: research and development, lifelong training of workers at all levels, improved access to finance, and an increased role for workers and communities in creating and sharing in the gains from innovative manufacturing. These problems can be solved with the help of public policies that do the following: promote high-road production; include a mix of policies that operate at the level of the entire economy, individual industries, and individual manufacturers; and encourage workers, employers, unions, and government to share responsibility for improving the nation’s manufacturing base and to share in the gains from such improvements

Helper, Susan; Krueger, Timothy; Wial, Howard;
2021
Availability: Link Link
Citations: 26 (based on OpenCitations) Cited By

---

6. Locating American Manufacturing : Trends in the Geography of Production

abstract

Analysis of data on employment, earnings, and the number of business establishments engaged in U.S. manufacturing finds that:In Metropolitan areas, especially large metropolitan areas and central metropolitan counties, contain the great majority of manufacturing jobs and nearly all very high-technology manufacturing jobs, reflecting the advantages they provide to manufacturing in general and very high-technology manufacturing in particular. In 2010, metropolitan areas contained 79.5 percent of all manufacturing jobs, 78.6 percent of moderately high-technology manufacturing jobs, and 95 percent of very high-technology manufacturing jobs.U.S. metropolitan areas have become increasingly specialized in manufacturing since 1980 but they vary widely in their manufacturing activities and focuses. Nearly all metropolitan areas specialize strongly in at least one manufacturing industry even if they do not specialize strongly in manufacturing as a whole.Manufacturing in most metropolitan areas follows one or more of six broad patterns of industry clustering. These patterns are anchored in high specializations in computers and electronics, transportation equipment, low-wage manufacturing industries, chemicals, machinery, and food production.Manufacturing wages vary widely among metropolitan areas. In the nation’s 100 largest metropolitan areas, the average manufacturing earnings are highest in San Jose, at about $145,000 per year, and lowest in McAllen, at about $35,000.Metropolitan manufacturing plants are relatively small but vary widely in size among metropolitan areas. In 2009, the average metropolitan manufacturing plant had 57.4 employees, a figure that ranged from a high of 203.6 in Kingsport, TN, to a low of 9.1 in Ocean City, NJ.The long-term shift of manufacturing jobs toward the South came to a halt in the first decade of the 21st century, while the Midwest had the fastest manufacturing job gains over the last two years. Between 2000 and 2010 both the Midwest and the South lost about 34 percent of their manufacturing jobs, while between the first quarter of 2010 and the fourth quarter of 2011 the Midwest saw a manufacturing job gain of 5.2 percent while the South saw a gain of 2.2 percent. The early 21st century saw a resumption or continuation of long-term shifts of manufacturing jobs away from metropolitan areas and central metropolitan counties. Between 2000 and 2010 the central counties of metropolitan areas with three or more counties lost 33.9 percent of their manufacturing jobs while the outlying counties of those metropolitan areas lost 29.3 percent. Although metropolitan areas lost manufacturing jobs at a slower rate than nonmetropolitan counties between 2000 and 2010, nonmetropolitan counties gained manufacturing jobs more rapidly than metropolitan areas during the past two years.In view of these findings, public policy should enhance the innovation and productivity advantages that metropolitan areas offer manufacturers, while eliminating artificial incentives for manufacturers to seek low-wage locations. Because there is so much regional variation in manufacturing, federal policy should provide a platform for state, local, and metropolitan efforts, which can formulate policies to respond to regional needs

Helper, Susan; Krueger, Timothy; Wial, Howard;
2021
Availability: Link Link
Citations: 4 (based on OpenCitations) Cited By

---

7. Strengthening American Manufacturing : A New Federal Approach

abstract

Improving manufacturing’s performance is a crucial part of the solution to America’s trade, innovation, and income distribution problems and is especially important to the well-being of metropolitan areas throughout the Great Lakes region. Manufacturing’s decline has contributed to the nation’s huge trade deficit and worsening earnings distribution, and puts America’s innovation potential at risk. To address these problems, the federal government should adopt policies toimprove the performance of manufacturing firms in the United States. It should support the development and diffusion of improved manufacturing technologies, ways of organizing work, and relationships between final goods producers (typically, assemblers) and their suppliers; help groups of manufacturers within an industry work together to improve performance; and promote understanding of the importance of the economic and geographic ties that among U.S. manufacturers that contribute to U.S. manufacturing performance. These policies would not favor any particular industries, but would help solve problems that exist in both newer manufacturing industries (such as solar panels) and older ones (such as auto assembly)

Helper, Susan; Wial, Howard;
2021
Availability: Link Link

---

8. Complementarity and Cost Reduction : Evidence from the Auto Supply Industry

abstract

Over the last 20 years, the success of Japanese manufacturing firms has brought renewed attention to the importance of cost reduction on existing products as a source of productivity growth. This paper uses survey data and field interviews from the auto supply industry to explore the determinants of average-cost reduction for a sample of 171 plants in the United States and Canada between 1988 and 1992. The main result is that the determinants of cost reduction differ markedly between firms which had employee involvement programs in 1988 and firms that did not. The two groups of firms achieved equal amounts of cost reduction, but did so in very different ways. Firms with employee involvement saw their costs fall more if they also had such involvement gained no cost-reduction benefit from these programs; instead, their cost-reduction success was largely a function of increases in volume. These results provide support for Milgrom and Roberts's concept that certain production practices exhibit complementarity

Helper, Susan;
2021
Availability: Link

---

9. Accelerating Advanced Manufacturing with New Research Centers

abstract

Manufacturing remains a critical sector for the economic health of the nation as a whole and for the states. The sector accounts for the bulk of U.S. exports, is key to innovation, and provides many high-wage jobs for less educated workers. So reversing or at least stemming manufacturing job losses is essential to an economic recovery that leads to a sustained period of exportoriented, innovation-fueled, opportunity-rich economic growth. For these and other reasons, manufacturing should be an important part of state job growth strategies. But state efforts are not focused on what would be most helpful for manufacturers: which is helping them, particularly small and medium-sized businesses in the manufacturing supply chain, develop or apply more advanced technologies. To remedy this problem, states should create advanced manufacturing centers that provide both research to develop new, relevant technologies and the education to help businesses throughout the supply chain apply these technologies to their work. These centers would take only a modest investment of $9 million per year, which is a small share of what states typically spend on traditional business attraction efforts

Helper, Susan; Wial, Howard;
2021
Availability: Link Link

---

10. What goes on under the hood? : how engineers innovate in the automotive supply chain

Helper, Susan; Kuan, Jennifer;
2016
Type: Arbeitspapier; Working Paper; Graue Literatur; Non-commercial literature;
Availability: Link

---

Load More