Journal of Productivity Analysis

, Volume 39, Issue 2, pp 123–130 | Cite as

The effect of labor supply changes on output: empirical evidence from US industries

  • Gokhan H. Akay
  • Can Dogan


In this paper we examine the relationship between labor supply and industry-level output in the context of the specific factors model. Jones (Trade, balance of payment and growth: essays in honor of Charles P. Kindleberger, Amsterdam, pp 3–21, 1971) shows that a rise in the amount of labor in the economy will increase the output in all industries. We empirically show which industry output is predicted to expand more when the size of labor force grows. Unlike the commonly used Rybczynski Theorem (Economica 22:336–341, 1955) of the Heckscher-Ohlin model, the specific factors model shows that a comparison both of labor intensities and labor demand elasticities plays an important role in determining which output expands relatively more when the size of labor force grows. For this purpose, we illustrate the importance of the parameters of the model in determining how changes in the labor supply affect the output change, with special reference to elasticities of substitution in production. We estimate the elasticity of substitution by using CES production function and show how these estimates describe the general equilibrium of production with one mobile factor (labor) and 25 industries of the US economy using data for 1979–2001. We show that the increase in the supply of labor raise output in all industries, but the magnitudes of the increases in some industries are more than others depending on the value of the elasticity of substitution along with factor intensities between industries. The largest output effect occurs for educational, health care and social service, where a 1 % supply of labor increase would raise output 10.5 %. However, the growth in the labor supply has a small impact on output growth in the range of 0.1–0.6 % in agriculture, petroleum, coal product and finance and insurance industries.


Specific factors model Output change Factor intensity Elasticity of substitution 

JEL Classification

F1 F16 



We are particularly grateful to Roy Ruffin for his helpful suggestions.


  1. Arrow KJ, Chenery HB, Minhas BS, Solow RM (1961) Capital-labor substitution and economic efficiency. Rev Econ Stat 43:225–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Balistreri EJ, McDaniel CA, Wong EV (2003) An estimation of US industry-level capital-labor substitution elasticities: support for Cobb-Douglas. North Am J Econ Finance 14:343–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernstein J, Weinstein D (2002) Do endowments predict the location of production? Evidence from national and international data. J Int Econ 56(1):55–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blum B (2010a) Trade, technology, and the rise of the service sector: the effects on US wage inequality. J Int Econ 74:441–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blum B (2010b) Endowments, output, and the bias of directed innovation. Rev Econ Stud 77:534–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Diewert WE (1974) Applications of Dual Theory. In: Intriligator M, Kendrick D (eds) Frontiers of Quantitative Economics, vol 2. North Holland, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  7. Edwards TH, Whalley J (2007) Short- and long-run decompositions of UK wage inequality changes. Bull Econ Res 59(1):1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gandal N, Hanson G, Slaughter M (2004) Technology, trade, and adjustment to immigration in Israel. Eur Econ Rev 48:403–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hanson GH, Slaughter MC (1999) The Rybczinski theorem, factor price equalization, and immigration: evidence from US States, NBER working paper 7074, NBER, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  10. Harrigan J (1995) Factor endowments & the international location of production: econometric evidence for the OECD, 1970–1985. J Int Econ 19(1/2):123–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jones RW (2006) Protection and real wages: the history of an idea. Jpn Econ Rev 57(4):457–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jones RW (1971) A three-factor model in theory, trade and history. In: Bhagwati, Jones, Vanek (eds) Trade, balance of payments and growth: essays in honor of Charles P. kindleberger, North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam, London, pp 3–21Google Scholar
  13. Jones RW, Ruffin RJ (2008) Trade and wages: a deeper investigation. Rev Int Econ 16(2):234–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kee LH (2009) Findlay-Grubert versus Rybczynski: testing growth hypotheses in classic trade theories using Singapore’s industries. J Int Trade Econ Dev 18(4):443–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kohli U (1978) A gross national product function and the derived demand for imports and supply of exports. Can J Econ 11:167–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kohli U (1991) Technology, duality and foreign trade. University of Michigan Press, Ann ArborGoogle Scholar
  17. Kohli U (1993) A symmetric normalized quadratic Gnp function and the US demand for imports and supply of exports. Int Econ Rev 34:243–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Leamer E (1998) In search of Stolper-Samuelson linkages between international trade and lower wage. In: Collins S (ed) Imports, Exports and the American Worker, Brookings Institution, Washington D.C, p 141–202Google Scholar
  19. Mayer W (1974) Short-run and long-run equilibrium for a small open economy. J Polit Econ 82:955–967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mussa M (1974) Tariffs and the distribution of income: the importance of factor specificity, substitutability and intensity in the short and long run. J Polit Econ 82:1191–1203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Neary P (1978) Short-run capital specificity and the pure theory of international trade. Econ J 88:488–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nelson RR (1965) The CES production function and economic growth projections. Rev Econ Stat 47:326–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rybczynski TM (1955) Factor endowments and relative commodity prices. Economica 22:336–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Survey of Current Business (2000) Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S Department of Commerce. Washington D.C. (
  25. Viner J (1931) Cost curves and supply curves. Zeitschrift fur Nationalokonomie 3:23–46Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of International TradeIstanbul Kemerburgaz UniversityIstanbulTurkey
  2. 2.Department of EconomicsNorth American CollegeHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations