Product Market Reforms and Productivity: A Review of the Theoretical and Empirical Literature on the Transmission Channels

  • Gaëtan Nicodème
  • Jacques-Bernard Sauner-Leroy


Product market reforms are microeconomic structural reforms that aim to improve the functioning of product markets by increasing competition amongst producers of goods and services. Theoretical models suggest that regulation and reforms which liberalise or improve the functioning of markets can positively affect productivity through three different channels, namely a reallocation of scarce resources (allocative efficiency), an improvement in the utilisation of the production factors by firms (productive efficiency) and an incentive for firms to innovate to move to the modern technology frontier (dynamic efficiency). This paper reviews the theoretical and empirical literature on these three channels and discusses policy implications for the European Union.


product markets reforms competition productivity efficiency 

JEL Classifications

O12 O30 O40 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Acs, Z.J. and Audretsch, B.D., “Innovation, market structure and firm size,” Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 69, pp. 567–575, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aghion, P. and Howitt, P., “A model of growth through creative destruction,” Econometrica, vol. 60, pp. 323–351, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aghion, P. and Howitt, P., Endogenous Growth Theory. MIT Press: Cambridge and London, 1998.Google Scholar
  4. Aghion, P. and Cohen, E., Education et croissance, Rapport pour le Conseil d’Analyse Economique, Paris, 2004.Google Scholar
  5. Aghion, P., Harris, C., and Vickers, J., “Competition and growth with step-by-step innovation: An example,” European Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings, pp. 771–782, 1997.Google Scholar
  6. Aghion, P., Harris, C., Howitt, P., and Vickers, J., “Competition, imitation and growth with step-by-step innovation,” Review of Economic Studies, vol. 68, pp. 467–492, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Aghion, P., Bloom, N., Blundell, R., Griffith R., and Howitt, P., “Competition and innovation: An inverted U relationship,” NBER Working paper, n°9269, October 2002.Google Scholar
  8. Aghion, P., Blundell, R., Griffith, R., Howitt, P., and Prantl, S., “Firm entry and growth: Theory and micro evidence,” mimeo, 2003a.Google Scholar
  9. Aghion, P., Burgess, R., Redding, S., and Bilizotti F., “The unequal effects of liberalization: Theory and evidence from India,” mimeo,, 2003b.
  10. Ahn, S., “Firm dynamics and productivity growth: A review of micro evidence from OECD countries,” OECD Economics Department Working Papers, N° 297, 2001.Google Scholar
  11. Ahn, S., “Competition, innovation and productivity growth: A review of theory and evidence,” OECD Economics Department Working Papers, N° 317, 2002.Google Scholar
  12. Aiginger, K., “A three tier strategy for successful European countries in the nineties,” International Review of Applied Economics, vol. 18(4), 2004.Google Scholar
  13. Aiginger, K. and Landesmann, M., “Competitive economic performance: The European view,” WIFO Working papers, No. 179, 2002.Google Scholar
  14. Allen, C., Gasiorek, M., and Smith, A., “European single market: How the programme has fostered competition,” Economic Policy, pp. 441–486, 1998.Google Scholar
  15. Baily, M.N., Hulten, C., and Campbell, D., “Productivity dynamics in manufacturing plants,” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity: Microeconomics, pp. 187–267, 1992.Google Scholar
  16. Bain, J.S., “Relation of profit rate to industry concentration: American manufacturing 1936–1940,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 65, pp. 293–324, 1951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bain, J.S., Barriers to New Competition. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, 1956.Google Scholar
  18. Barnes, M., Haskell, J., and Maliranta, M., “The sources of productivity growth: Micro-level evidence for the OECD,” Paper presented at the OECD workshop on firm-level statistics, OECD, November 2001, Paris, 2001.Google Scholar
  19. Bayoumi, T., Laxton, D., and Pesenti, P., “Benefits and spillovers of greater competition in Europe: A macroeconomic assessment,” Bank Working Paper Series, N° 341, 2004.Google Scholar
  20. Bernstein, J., “R&D and productivity growth in Canadian communication equipment and manufacturing,” Industry Canada Working Paper, 1996.Google Scholar
  21. Bils, M., “The cyclical behaviour of marginal cost and price,” American Economic Review, vol. 77, pp. 838–885, 1987.Google Scholar
  22. Blundell, R.W., Griffith, R., and Van Reenen, J., “Market share, market value and innovation in a panel of British manufacturing firms,” Review of Economic Studies, n°66, pp. 529–554, 1999.Google Scholar
  23. Brandt, N., “Business dynamics, regulation and performance,” STI Working papers, 2004/3, OECD, Paris, 2004.Google Scholar
  24. Caves, R.E. and Barton, D.R., Efficiency in US Manufacturing Industries. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 1990.Google Scholar
  25. Caves, R.E., et al., Industrial Efficiency in Six Nations. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 1992.Google Scholar
  26. Cincera, M. and Galgau, O., “Impact of market entry and exit on EU productivity and growth performance,” Economic Paper, n° 222, European Commission, Brussels, 2005.Google Scholar
  27. Conway, P., Janod, V., and Nicoletti, G., “Product market regulation in OECD countries: 1998 to 2003,” OECD working paper, No. 419, February 2005, 2005.Google Scholar
  28. Dasgupta, P. and Stiglitz, J., “Industrial structure and the nature of innovative activity,” Economic Journal, vol. 90, pp. 266–293, 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Denis, C., McMorrow, K., and Röger, W., “An analysis of EU and US productivity developments,” Economic Papers, n° 208, European Commission, Brussels, 2004.Google Scholar
  30. Denis, C., McMorrow, K., Röger, W., and Veugelers, R., “The Lisbon strategy and the EU’s structural productivity problem,” Economic Papers, n° 221, European Commission, Brussels, 2005.Google Scholar
  31. Disney, R.F., Haskel, J., and Heden, Y., “Restructuring and productivity growth in UK manufacturing,” CEPR Discussion Papers n°2463, 2000.Google Scholar
  32. European Commission, “Economic evaluation of the internal market,” European Economy, reports and studies, N°4, 1996.Google Scholar
  33. European Commission, “Corporation tax and innovation,” Innovation papers, n°19, 2002a.Google Scholar
  34. European Commission, “Structural reforms in labour and product markets and macroeconomic performance in the EU,” in the EU Economy: 2002 Review, 2002b.Google Scholar
  35. European Commission, “The Internal Market—Ten years without frontiers,” 2002c.Google Scholar
  36. European Commission, “Drivers of productivity growth: An economy-wide and industry level perspective,” the EU Economy: 2003 Review, 2003.Google Scholar
  37. European Commission, “The link between product market reforms and productivity: Direct and indirect impacts,” The EU review 2004, chapter 5, 2004.Google Scholar
  38. European Commission, “The economic costs of non-Lisbon,” European Economy, March 2005.Google Scholar
  39. Green, A. and Mayes, D.G., “Technical efficiency in manufacturing industries,” Economic Journal, vol. 101, pp. 523–538, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Griffith, R., “How important is business R&D for economic growth and should the government subsidise it?,” IFS Briefing notes, Institute for Fiscal Studies, October 2000.Google Scholar
  41. Griffith, R., “Product market competition, efficiency and agency costs: An empirical analysis,” Institute for Fiscal Studies, Working Paper 01/12, June, 2001.Google Scholar
  42. Griffith, R. and Simpson, H., “Characteristics of foreign-owned firms in British manufacturing,” NBER Working paper, n° 9573, Cambridge, MA, 2003.Google Scholar
  43. Griffith, R. and Harrison, R., “The link between product market reform and macro-economic performance,” Economic Paper, n° 209, European Commission, 2004.Google Scholar
  44. Griffith, R., Redding, S., and Van Reenen J., “Mapping the two faces of R&D: Productivity growth in a panel of OECD studies,” IFS working paper, n° 02/00, 2000.Google Scholar
  45. Griffith, R., Harrison, R., and Simpson, H., “The link between product market reform, innovation and EU macroeconomic performance,” Economic Paper, n° 243, European Commission, 2006.Google Scholar
  46. Griliches, Z. and Regev, H., “Productivity and firm turnover in Israeli industry 1979–1988,” Journal of Econometrics, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 175–203, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Guellec, D. and Van Pottelsberghe, B. “R&D and productivity growth: Panel data analysis of 16 OECD countries,” OECD Economic studies, n°33, Paris, 2001.Google Scholar
  48. Harberger, A.C., “Monopoly and resource allocation,” American Economic Review, vol. 44(N°2), pp. 77–87, 1954.Google Scholar
  49. Harrison, A.E., “Productivity, imperfect competition and trade reform. Theory and evidence,” Journal of International Economics, vol. 36, pp. 53–73, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Hart, O., “The market as an incentive mechanism,” Bell Journal of Economics, vol. 14, pp. 336–382, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Haskel, J., “Imperfect competition, work practices and productivity growth,” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, vol. 53(3), pp. 265–279, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. IMF, “Unemployment and labor market institutions: Why reforms pay off,” in IMF World Economic Outlook, April, Chapter IV, 2003.Google Scholar
  53. Jacquemin, A. and Sapir, A., “Competition and imports in the European market,” in Winters, L.A. and Venables, A.J. (eds.), European Integration: Trade and Industry. Cambridge (Cambridge University Press), 1991.Google Scholar
  54. Jagannathan, R. and Srinivasan, S.B., “Does product market competition reduce agency costs?,” NBER, Working Paper Series, 7480, 2000.Google Scholar
  55. Jones, C. and Williams, J., “Measuring the social return to R&D,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 113, pp. 1119–1135, 1998 (Nov.).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Leibenstein, H., “Allocative efficiency versus X-efficiency,” American Economic Review, vol. 56, pp. 392–415, 1966.Google Scholar
  57. MacDonald, J.M., “Does import competition force efficient production?,” Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 76, pp. 721–727, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Machin, S. and Van Reenen, J., “Profit margins and the business cycle: Evidence from UK manufacturing firms,” Journal of Industrial Economics, vol. 41, no. 1, 1993 (March).Google Scholar
  59. Melitz, M., “The impact of trade on intra-industry reallocations and aggregate industry productivity,” Harvard, Mimeo, forthcoming in Econometrica, 2003.Google Scholar
  60. Meyer, M.A. and Vickers, J., “Performance comparisons and dynamic incentives,” Journal of Political Economy, vol. 105(3), pp. 547–581, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Nickell, S.J., “Competition and corporate performance,” Journal of Political Economy, vol. 104(N°4) pp. 724–746, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Nickell, S., Wadhwani, S., and Wall, M., “Productivity growth in UK companies, 1975–86,” European Economic Review, vol. 36, pp. 1055–1091, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Nickell, S., Nicolitsas, D., and Dryden, N., “What makes firms perform well,” European Economic Review, vol. 41, pp. 783–796, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Nicoletti, G. and Scarpetta, S., “Regulation, productivity and growth: OECD evidence,” Economic Policy, vol. 18(1), pp. 9–72(64), 2003 (April).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Oliveira Martins, J., Scarpetta, S., and Pilat, D., “Mark-up ratios in manufacturing industries — Estimates for 14 OECD countries,” OECD Economics Department Working Papers, n°162, Paris, 1996.Google Scholar
  66. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, “The benefits of liberalising product markets and reducing barriers to international trade and investment: The case of the United States and the European Union,” Economics department Working paper, No 432, 2005.Google Scholar
  67. Pilat, D., “Competition, productivity and efficiency,” OECD Economic Studies, n°27, Paris, 1996.Google Scholar
  68. Rao, S., Tang, J., and Wang, W., “The importance of skills for innovation and productivity,” International Productivity Monitor, n°4, 2002 (Spring).Google Scholar
  69. Romer, P.M., “Endogenous technological change,” Journal of Political Economy, vol. 98, pp. 71–102, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Sauner-Leroy, J.-B., “The impact of the implementation of the Single Market Programme on productive efficiency and on mark-ups in the European Union manufacturing industry,” European Commission Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs, Economic Papers, No 192, 2003.Google Scholar
  71. Scherer, F. and Ross, D., Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance, 3rd edition. Houghton Mifflin: Boston, 1990.Google Scholar
  72. Schmalensee, R., “Studies of structure and performance,” in Schmalensee R. and Willig, R. (eds.), Handbooks of Industrial Organization, vol. 2. Amsterdam, North-Holland (Elsevier), 1989.Google Scholar
  73. Sharpe, A., “Productivity concepts, trends and prospects: An overview,” Review of Economic Performance and Social Progress, vol. 2, 1995.Google Scholar
  74. Sutton, J., “Market structure: the bounds approach,” mimeo,, 2002.
  75. Vickers, J., “Concepts of competition,” Oxford Economic Papers, 47, 1995.Google Scholar
  76. Winston, C., “Economic deregulation: Days of reckoning for microeconomists,” Journal of Economic Literature, vol. 31, pp. 1263–1289, 1993 (September).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© European Communities 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gaëtan Nicodème
    • 1
  • Jacques-Bernard Sauner-Leroy
    • 2
  1. 1.European Commission and Solvay Business School (ULB)BrusselsBelgium
  2. 2.Banque de FranceParisFrance

Personalised recommendations