The present article is an attempt to analyse the performance of Punjab’s manufacturing sector. For this, data used is of 12 two-digit industrial groups from 1980–81 to 2007–08. Dividing the entire data into pre-reform and post-reform period, the results of total factor productivity (TFP) of Punjab’s manufacturing sector revealed that it experienced meagre improvement (1.6 per cent per annum) during the last 28 years. Technical efficiency change (TEC) contributed more than technical change (TC) to TFPG. Paper and paper products (28), followed by non-metallic mineral products (32) and cotton, wool, silk and jute products (23 + 24 + 25) are most productive industrial groups. Wood and wood products (27) and leather and leather products (29) are least productive industrial groups. Among all the industrial groups, chemical and chemical products (30) acted as an innovator for maximum number of years, that is, 13 years. Panel data results highlighted that output, labour skills, size of factory and good emoluments to employees have a positive significant influence on TFP of Punjab’s manufacturing sector. The study concludes by giving policy implications.
AggarwalS. C. (2004). Labor quality in Indian manufacturing: A state-level analysis. Working Paper No. 126, April. New Delhi: Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations.
2.
AhluwaliaI. J. (1991). Productivity and growth in Indian manufacturing. Delhi: Oxford University Press.
3.
BabuS. (2002). Competition and competitiveness among states. Economic and Political Weekly, 37(13), 1281–1284.
4.
BanerjiA. (1975). Capital intensity and productivity in Indian industry. New Delhi: Macmillan.
5.
BrysonT. (2011, January). Firm productivity in Jamaica: An investigation of total factor productivity with micro level firm data (Draft). Bank of Jamaica.
6.
BurangeL. G. (2000). Import intensity in the registered manufacturing sector of India. Working Paper No. UDE (GE) 6:3. Mumbai: Department of Economics, University of Mumbai.
7.
BurangeL. G. (2004). Energy and labour use in the organised manufacturing sector of Maharashtra. Working Paper No.14/2. Mumbai: Department of Economics, University of Mumbai.
8.
CavesD. W.ChristensenL. R.DiewertE. W. (1982). The economic theory of index numbers and the measurement of input, output and productivity. Econometrica, 50(6), 1393–1414.
9.
Centre for Rural Research and Industrial Development (CRRID). (2002). Punjab Development Report. Chandigarh: Planning Commission, Government of India.
10.
Coelli TimJ.Prasada RaoD. S. (2005). Total factor productivity growth in agriculture: A Malmquist index analysis of 93 countries, 1980–2000. Agricultural Economics, 32(s1), 115–134.
11.
Deb ArnabK.Ray SubashC. (2013). Economic reforms and total factor productivity growth of Indian manufacturing: An inter-state analysis. Working Paper Series 2013–14 R. Department of Economics, University of Connecticut.
12.
DholakiaB. H.DholakiaR. H. (1994). Total factor productivity growth in Indian manufacturing. Economic and Political Weekly, 29(53), 3342–3344.
13.
FareR.GrosskopfS.NorrisM.ZhangZ. (1994). Productivity growth, technical progress and efficiency change in industrialised countries. American Economic Review, 84(1), 66–83.
14.
FuX. (2004). Exports, technical progress and productivity growth in Chinese manufacturing industries. Working Paper No. 278. Enterprise and Small and Medium Enterprises Centre (ESRC) for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
15.
FuX. (2005). Exports, technical progress and productivity growth in transition economy: A non-parametric approach for China. Applied Economics, 37(7), 725–739.
16.
GhoseArpitaBiswas ParamitaRoy. (2010). Nexus between real effective exchange rate and TFPG of manufacturing sector: Evidence from a non-parametric approach with Indian data. Paper presented at the 12th Money and Finance ConferenceMarch 11–12. Mumbai: Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research.
17.
GhoseA.ChakrabortyC. (2012). Total factor productivity growth in pharmaceutical industry: A look using modern time series approach with Indian data. Journal of Industrial Statistics, 1(2), 250–268.
18.
GhoshB.NeogiC. (1993). Productivity, efficiency and technology: The case of Indian manufacturing sector. Developing Economies, 31(3), 308–327.
19.
GoldarB. (1986). Productivity growth in Indian industry. New Delhi: Allied Publishers.
20.
GoldarBishwanathKumariAnita (2002). Import liberalisation and productivity growth in Indian manufacturing industries in the 1990s. Working Paper No. E/219/2002, January. New Delhi: Institute of Economic Growth.
21.
KiranR.JainV. (2012). An insight into productivity trends of small and medium manufacturing enterprises of Punjab in India. Paper presented in International Conference on Arts, Economics and Literature (ICAEL 2012), December14–15, Singapore.
22.
KumarS. (2001). Productivity and factor substitution: Theory and analysis. New Delhi: Deep and Deep Publications Pvt. Ltd.
23.
KumarS. (2006). A decomposition of total factor productivity growth: A regional analysis of Indian industrial manufacturing growth. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 55(3–4), 311–331.
24.
KwakH. (1994). Changing trade policy and its impact on TFP in the Republic of Korea. Developing Economies, 32(4), 398–421.
25.
MajumdarS. K. (1997). The impact of size and age on firm-level performance: Some evidence from India. Review of Industrial Organizations, 12(2), 231–241.
26.
MitraA. (1999). Total factor productivity growth and technical efficiency in Indian industry. Economic and Political Weekly, 34(31), M98–M105.
27.
MukherjeeD.(2004). Productivity in the small manufacturing enterprises: Determinants and policy issues. Indian Journal of Labour Economics, 47(4), 913–927.
28.
MukherjeeG. P. (1963). On size-productivity relationship in Indian industries. Journal of Industrial Economics, 2(2), 141–159.
29.
MukherjeeK.RayS. C.MillerS. M. (2001). Productivity growth in large US commercial banks: The initial post-deregulation experience. Journal of Banking and Finance, 25(5), 913–939.
30.
NatarajanR. R. S.DuraisamyM. (2008). Efficiency and productivity in the Indian unorganised manufacturing sector: Did reforms matter?International Review of Economics, 55(4), 373–399.
31.
OkudaS. (1994). Taiwan’s trade and FDI policies and their effect on productivity growth. Developing Economies, 32(4), 423–434.
32.
PerkinsF.YuxinZ.YoungC. (1993). The impact of reform on productivity growth in Chinese industry: A case of Xiamen special economic zone. Asian Economic Journal, 7(2), 107–146.
33.
RayC. S.DesliE. (1997) Productivity growth, technical progress, and efficiency change in Industrialised countries; comment. American Economic Review, 87(5), 1033–1039.
34.
RoychaudharyU. D. (1977). Industrial breakdown of capital stock in India. Journal of Income and Wealth, 2(2), 504–535.
35.
SamraJ. N.RaoY. V. A. (1990). Indian cement industry—A regional analysis. Indian Journal of Regional Science, 22(1), 33–44.
36.
SharmaK.JayasuriyaS.OczkowskiE. (2000). Liberalisation and productivity growth: The case of manufacturing industry in Nepal. Oxford Development Studies, 28(2), 205–222.
37.
SinghL. (2010). Post-reform economic development in Punjab: Constraints and remedies. MPRA Working Paper No. 26741, November. Patiala: Punjabi University.
38.
SinghP.AjitD. (1995). Production functions in the manufacturing industries in India 1974–1990. Reserve Bank of India Occasional Papers, 16(2), 241–266.
39.
TruebloodM. A.CogginsJ. (2003). Intercountry agricultural efficiency and productivity: A Malmquist index approach. Mimeographed document. Washington, DC, United States: World Bank.
40.
UrataS.YokotaK. (1994). Trade liberalisation and productivity growth in Thailand. Developing Economies, 32(4), 444–458.
41.
World Bank. (2004) Resuming Punjab’s Prosperity: The Opportunities and Challenges Ahead. Washington, DC: World Bank.
42.
YadavI. S. (2007). Firm size and growth: The Indian experience. ICFAI Journal of Industrial Economics, 4(1), 37–48.
43.
Yean
ThamSiew. (1997). Determinants of productivity growth in the Malaysian manufacturing sector. ASEAN Economic Bulletin, 13(3), 333–343.
