Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T13:27:48.070Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Plant Closures and the Productivity ‘Miracle’ in Manufacturing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 March 2020

Nicholas Oulton
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

There has been a considerable improvement in labour productivity in UK manufacturing in the 1980s. Manufacturing output per person employed rose at an annual rate of only 0.7 per cent between 1973 and 1979 but at 4.1 per cent between 1979 and 1985. However, the cause or causes of this improvement have not been generally agreed. Muellbauer (1986) suggested five principal hypotheses to account for the improvement (see also Mendis and Muellbauer, 1984):

  1. (1) Technology, in particular the of the microelectronic revolution.

  2. (2) Improved industrial relations, due in part to the decline of unionism caused by the recession of the 1980s and in part to the change in the laws governing trade unions brought in by the first two Thatcher governments.

  3. (3) Capital scrapping—the period 1973–80 may have been one of large-scale unrecorded scrapping, since large parts of the capital stock became obsolete after the oil price rises; slow growth of capital per person would have led to slow growth in output per person but these trends may have been reversed after 1981.

  4. (4) Labour utilisation—this was low during the recession but the subsequent recovery produced a biased measure of the true productivity picture.

  5. (5) Plant closures—the recession led to the closure of low productivity plants, thus automatically raising the average productivity level of the survivors. The analogy with a batting average has sometimes been drawn—if the tail-enders are not allowed to bat, the average, though not of course the total, score is likely to be higher.

Type
Articles
Information
National Institute Economic Review , Volume 121 , August 1987 , pp. 53 - 59
Copyright
Copyright © 1987 National Institute of Economic and Social Research

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

(1)

I am grateful for their helpful comments to Andrew Britton, Peter Hart, Kit Jones and Sig Prais.

References

Ball, J.M. and Skeoch, N.K. (1981), ‘Inter-plant comparisons of productivity and earnings'. Government Economic Service Working Paper, no.38, Department of Employment.Google Scholar
Business Statistics Office (1978), Historical Record of the Census of Production 1907 to 1970, London, HMSO.Google Scholar
Business Statistics Office (1982), Report on the Census of Production 1979: summary tables (PA 1002 1979), London, HMSO.Google Scholar
Business Statistics Office (1983a), Analysis of United Kingdom Manufacturing (Local) Units by Employment Size (PA1003 1979), London, HMSO.Google Scholar
Business Statistics Office (1983b), Report on the Census of Production 1980: summary tables (PA 1002 1980), London, HMSO.Google Scholar
Business Statistics Office (1983c), Census of Production and Purchase Enquiry: analysis of production industries by Standard Industrial Classification revised 1980 (PA1002.1 1979), London, HMSO.Google Scholar
Business Statistics Office (1984), Analysis of United Kingdom Manufacturing (Local) Units by Employment Size (PA1003 1982), London, HMSO.Google Scholar
Business Statistics Office (1985a), Analysis of United Kingdom Manufacturing (Local) Units by Employment Size (PA 1003 1984), London, HMSO.Google Scholar
Business Statistics Office (1985b), Report on the Census of Production 1982: summary tables (PA1002 1982), London, HMSO.Google Scholar
Business Statistics Office (1986), Size Analysis of United Kingdom Businesses (PA1003 1986), London, HMSO.Google Scholar
Business Statistics Office (1987), Report on the Census of Production 1984: summary tables (PA1002 1984), London, HMSO.Google Scholar
Central Statistical Office (1987), Economic Trends Annual Supplement: 1987 Edition, London, HMSO.Google Scholar
Daniel, W.W. and Millward, N. (1983), Workplace Industrial Relations in Britain: the DE/PSI/ESRC Survey, London, Heinemann.Google Scholar
Davies, S. and Caves, R.E. (1987), Britain's Productivity Gap, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Edwards, P.K. (1980), ‘Size of plant and strike-proneness’, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, vol. 42.Google Scholar
Gausden, R. (1987), ‘An analysis of the movement of productivity in the UK manufacturing sector over the period 1979-85’, NIESR, mimeo.Google Scholar
Mendis, L. and Muellbauer, J. (1984), ‘British manufacturing productivity 1955-83: measurement problems, oil shocks and Thatcher effects’, Centre for Economic Policy Research, Discussion Paper, no.32.Google Scholar
Millward, N. and Stevens, M. (1986), British Workplace Industrial Relations 1980-1984: the DE/ESRC/PSI/ACAS Surveys, London, Gower.Google Scholar
Muellbauer, J. (1986), ‘The assessment: productivity and competitiveness in British manufacturing’, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, vol. 2, autumn 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prais, S.J. (1981), Productivity and Industrial Structure: a statistical study of manufacturing industry in Britain, Germany and the United States, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar