The study analyses the debate around the ambiguous relationship between firm size and performance. We explore how productivity varies across firm sizes in the informal sector, where firm size is sensitive to formal regulations. Additionally, the study also looks into the informal firms’ quantity and quality of employment by observing wage and performance dispersion across firm sizes, thus indicating capital accumulation and exploitation. Considering the data limitations, a pseudo-panel data design was adopted by combining the three, only available, independent cross-sectional surveys by the National Sample Survey Office, spanning from 1999–2000 to 2015–2016. Potential issues such as time-invariant unobserved firm-level heterogeneity were accounted for by using panel random effects regression. Using total firm employment and total factor productivity as the primary measures of firm size and performance, we find a positive relationship between the two across all major industries. Our results stand robust against alternative firm size and performance measures. However, this positive association between size and performance indicated capital accumulation (increasing productivity with increasing size) at the expense of labour exploitation (stagnant wages across firm sizes). The obtained findings convey important policy implications for adopting a carrot-and-stick approach for the gradual formalisation of the economy.
AllenJ., NatarajS., & SchipperT. C. (2018). Strict duality and overlapping productivity distributions between formal and informal firms. Journal of Development Economics, 135, 534–554.
3.
AminM., & IslamA. (2015). Are large informal firms more productive than the small informal firms? Evidence from firm-level surveys in Africa. World Development, 74, 374–385.
4.
AntmanF., & McKenzieD. J. (2007). Earnings mobility and measurement error: A pseudo-panel approach. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 56, 125–161.
5.
AwB. Y. (2002). Productivity dynamics of small and medium enterprises in Taiwan. Small Business Economics, 18(1), 69–84.
6.
AwB. Y., ChenX., & RobertsM. J. (2001). Firm-level evidence on productivity differentials and turnover in Taiwanese manufacturing. Journal of Development Economics, 66(1), 51–86.
7.
BadrK., RizkR., & ZakiC. (2019). Firm productivity and agglomeration economies: Evidence from Egyptian data. Applied Economics, 51(51), 5528–5544.
8.
BailyM. N., BartelsmanE. J., & HaltiwangerJ. (1996). Downsizing and productivity growth: Myth or reality?Small Business Economics, 8(4), 259–278.
9.
BartelsmanE., HaltiwangerJ., & ScarpettaS. (2013). Cross-country differences in productivity: The role of allocation and selection. American Economic Review, 103(1), 305–334.
10.
BenjaminN. C., & MbayeA. A. (2012). The informal sector, productivity, and enforcement in West Africa: A firm-level analysis. Review of Development Economics, 16(4), 664–680.
11.
BerkelH., & TarpF. (2022). Informality and firm performance in Myanmar. The Journal of Development Studies, 58(7), 1363–1382.
12.
BigstenA., & GebreeyesusM. (2007). The small, the young, and the productive: Determinants of manufacturing firm growth in Ethiopia. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 55(4), 813–840.
13.
Cisneros-AcevedoC. (2022). Unfolding trade effect in two margins of informality. The Peruvian case. The World Bank Economic Review, 36(1), 141–170.
14.
DasguptaS., LiX., & WangA. Y. (2018). Product market competition shocks, firm performance, and forced CEO turnover. The Review of Financial Studies, 31(11), 4187–4231.
15.
DeP. K., & NagarajP. (2014). Productivity and firm size in India. Small Business Economics, 42, 891–907.
16.
De AndradeG. H., BruhnM., & McKenzieD. (2016). A helping hand or the long arm of the law? Experimental evidence on what governments can do to formalize firms. The World Bank Economic Review, 30(1), 24–54.
17.
DeatonA. (1985). Panel data from time series of cross-sections. Journal of Econometrics30, 109–126.
18.
DhawanR. (2001). Firm size and productivity differential: Theory and evidence from a panel of US firms. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 44(3), 269–293.
19.
GangI. N., Raj NatarajanR., & SenK. (2022). Finance, gender, and entrepreneurship: India’s informal sector firms. The Journal of Development Studies, 58(7), 1383–1402.
20.
GharleghiB., & JahanshahiA. A. (2020). The shadow economy and sustainable development: The role of financial development. Journal of Public Affairs, 20(3), e2099.
21.
GwinC. R. (2001). A guide for industry study and the analysis of firms and competitive strategy. http://faculty.babson.edu/gwin/indstudy/index.htm
22.
HoymanM. (1987). Female participation in the informal economy: A neglected issue. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 493, 64–82.
23.
InderstR., & ShafferG. (2009). Market power, price discrimination, and allocative efficiency in intermediate-goods markets. The RAND Journal of Economics, 40(4), 658–672.
24.
KathuriaV., Rajesh, RajS. N., & SenK. (2010). Organised versus unorganised manufacturing performance in the post-reform period. Economic & Political Weekly, 45(24), 55.
25.
KumariR. (2022). Differences in efficiency in the formal–informal dichotomy—A study of Indian firms. The Indian Economic Journal, 70(2), 289–312.
26.
KurokiM. (2018). Subjective well-being and minimum wages: Evidence from US states. Health Economics, 27(2), e171–e180.
27.
La PortaR., & ShleiferA. (2014). Informality and development. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 28, 109–126.
28.
LeibensteinH. (1976). Beyond economic man. Harvard University Press.
29.
LewisW. A. (1954). Economic development with unlimited supplies of labour. The Manchester School of Economic and Social, 22, 139–191.
30.
LiY., & RamaM. (2015). Firm dynamics, productivity growth, and job creation in developing countries: The role of micro- and small enterprises. World Bank Research Observer, 30, 3–38.
31.
MaitiD., & SenK. (2010). The informal sector in India: A means of exploitation or accumulation?Journal of South Asian Development, 5(1), 1–13.
32.
MakateC., SizibaS., Hanyani-MlamboB. T., SadombaZ., & MangoN. (2016). The efficiency of small and medium enterprises in informal metal manufacturing in Zimbabwe: Implications for stakeholders in the agricultural sector. Development Southern Africa, 33(2), 247–257.
33.
MazumdarD. (2009). A comparative study of the size structure of manufacturing in Asian countries. Asian Development Bank.
34.
McKenzieD., & SakhoY. S. (2010). Does it pay firms to register for taxes? The impact of formality on firm profitability. Journal of Development Economics, 91(1), 15–24.
35.
MoffittR. (1993). Identification and estimation of dynamic models with a time series of repeated cross-sections. Journal of Econometrics, 59(1-2), 99–123.
36.
MundC. S. (2020). Problems of MSME finance in India and role of credit guarantee fund trust for micro and small enterprises (CGTMSE). IOSR Journal of Economics and Finance, 11(4), 1–6.
37.
OlleyG. S., & PakesA. (1996). The dynamics of productivity in the telecommunications equipment industry. Econometrica, 64, 1263–1297.
38.
OnjiK. (2009). The response of firms to eligibility thresholds: Evidence from the Japanese value-added tax. Journal of Public Economics, 93(5-6), 766–775.
39.
PapolaT. S. (1980). Informal sector: Concept and policy. Economic and Political Weekly, 15(18) 817–824.
40.
PerryG. E., AriasO., FajnzylberP., MaloneyW. F., MasonA., & Saavedra-ChanduviJ. (2007). Informality: Exit and exclusion. The World Bank.
41.
RamachandranR., & SasidharanS. (2021). Co-location of formal and informal manufacturing and firm’s performance: Evidence from India. The Indian Economic Journal, 69(4), 600–613.
42.
RovigattiG., & MollisiV. (2018). Theory and practice of total-factor productivity estimation: The control function approach using Stata. The Stata Journal, 18(3), 618–662.
43.
SanyalK., & BhattacharyyaR. (2009). Beyond the factory: Globalisation, informalisation of production and the new locations of labour. Economic and Political Weekly, 44(22), 35–44.
44.
ShepherdW. G. (1986). On the core concepts of industrial economics. In Mainstreams in industrial organization (pp. 23–67). Springer, Dordrecht.
45.
SyversonC. (2011). What determines productivity? Journal of Economic Literature, 49(2), 326–365.
46.
ThoratS., & NewmanK. S. (2007). Caste and economic discrimination: Causes, consequences and remedies. Economic and Political Weekly, 42(41), 4121–4124.
47.
TyboutJ. R. (2000). Manufacturing firms in developing countries: How well do they do, and why?Journal of Economic Literature, 38(1), 11–44.
48.
UdinS., KhanM. A., & JavidA. Y. (2017). The effects of ownership structure on likelihood of financial distress: An empirical evidence. Corporate Governance, 17(4), 589–612.
49.
UlysseaG. (2018). Firms, informality, and development: Theory and evidence from Brazil. American Economic Review, 108(8), 2015–47.
50.
Van BiesebroeckJ. (2005). Firm size matters: Growth and productivity growth in African manufacturing. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 53(3), 545–583.
51.
WahabS., SafiA., WahabZ., ShahN. A., & ZhangX. (2022). Choice between formal and informal financing in cottage industry firm: The application of robust regression. Journal of Public Affairs, 22(1), e2241.
52.
WilliamsonO. E. (1975). Markets and hierarchies: Analysis and antitrust implications: A study in the economics of internal organization. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign’s Academy for Entrepreneurial Leadership Historical Research Reference in Entrepreneurship.
53.
WooldridgeJ. M. (2009). On estimating firm-level production functions using proxy variables to control for unobservables. Economics Letters, 104, 112–114.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
