In this article the author analyzes the interaction effect of the sunk cost of physical capital and of human capital on the entry of worker-owned firms (WOFs) and conventional firms (CFs). The author estimates a logit model and uses a comprehensive dataset of new French firms in manufacturing sectors with proxies of sunk costs defined at the sector level. The results show that the likelihood of WOF entry is the highest when the sunk cost of human capital is dominant while the sunk cost of physical capital is negligible, as predicted by Kazuhiko Mikami and Satoru Tanaka in their 2010 article. The interaction effect between the types of sunk costs is stronger for worker buyouts than for newly created WOFs. These results are robust to different estimation methods and to endogeneity concerns. These results contribute to the general understanding of the rarity of WOFs in manufacturing sectors and are relevant to policy initiatives supporting cooperative modes of firm organization.
AiCNortonEC (2003) Interaction terms in logit and probit models. Economics Letters80(1): 123–129.
2.
ArandoSGagoMJonesDCKatoT (2015) Efficiency in employee-owned enterprises: An econometric case study of Mondragon. Industrial and Labor Relations Review68(2): 398–425. https://doi.org/10.1177/0019793914564966
3.
BellocF (2017) What deters labor-owned firm creation? Evidence from Italian manufacturing sectors. Journal of Comparative Economics45(1): 139–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jce.2016.12.001
4.
Ben-NerA (1988a) The life cycle of worker-owned firms in market economies: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization10: 287–313.
5.
Ben-NerA (1988b) Comparative empirical observations on worker-owned and capitalist firms. International Journal of Industrial Organization6(1): 7–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-7187(88)90003-3
6.
BurdínG (2014) Are worker-managed firms more likely to fail than conventional enterprises? Evidence from Uruguay. Industrial and Labor Relations Review67(1): 202–238. https://doi.org/10.1177/001979391406700108
7.
ConteMAJonesDC (2015) On the entry of employee-owned firms: Theory and evidence from U.S. manufacturing industries, 1870–1960. In: KauhanenA (ed.) Advances in the Economic Analysis of Participatory & Labor-Managed Firms, Vol. 16. Bingley: Emerald, pp. 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0885-333920150000016001
8.
CostinotAOldenskiLRauchJ (2011) Adaptation and the boundary of multinational firms. The Review of Economics and Statistics93(1): 298–308. https://doi.org/10.1162/REST_a_00072
9.
CraigBPencavelJ (1992) The behavior of worker cooperatives: The plywood companies of the Pacific Northwest. The American Economic Review24: 1083–1105.
10.
CroceAMartíJMartín-LópezS (2018) Are policy measures effective in encouraging the creation of competitive employee-owned firms?Economic and Industrial Democracy42(1): 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143831X17745688
Díaz-FonceaMMarcuelloC (2015) Spatial patterns in new firm formation: Are cooperatives different?Small Business Economics44(1): 171–187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-014-9581-5
13.
DowGK (2003) Governing the Firm: Workers’ Control in Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14.
DowGK (2018) The Labor-Managed Firm: Theoretical Foundations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15.
EllermanD (2020) On some alleged ‘problems’ and alleged ‘solutions’ in democratic firms. Journal of Participation and Employee Ownership3(2/3): 135–147.
16.
FakhfakhFMagneNMirabelTPérotinV (2023) Employee-owned firms in France. Journal of Participation and Employee Ownership6(2): 101–127.
17.
FakhfakhFPérotinVGagoM (2012) Productivity, capital, and labor in labor-managed and conventional firms: An investigation on French data. Industrial and Labor Relations Review65(4): 847–879. https://doi.org/10.1177/001979391206500404
18.
GreeneW (2010) Testing hypotheses about interaction terms in nonlinear models. Economics Letters107(2): 291–296.
19.
GrienbergerKJanserMLehmerF (2023) The occupational panel for Germany. Jahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik243(6): 711–724.
20.
GrossmanSJHartOD (1986) The costs and benefits of ownership: A theory of vertical and lateral integration. Journal of Political Economy94(4): 691–719. https://doi.org/10.1086/261404
21.
GunnC (1992) Plywood co-operatives in the United States: An endangered species. Economic and Industrial Democracy13(4): 525–534.
22.
HansmannH (1996) The Ownership of Enterprise. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of the Harvard University Press.
23.
HartOMooreJ (1990) Property rights and the nature of the firm. Journal of Political Economy98(6): 1119–1158. https://doi.org/10.1086/261729
24.
JensenJBKletzerLG (2010) Measuring tradable services and the task content of offshorable services jobs. In: AbrahamKGSpletzerJRHarperM (eds) Labor in the New Economy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 309–335.
25.
JonesDC (1984) American producer cooperatives and employee owned firms: An historical perspective. In: JackallRLevinH (eds) Worker Cooperatives in America. Berkeley: University of California Press, pp. 37–56.
26.
MagneN (2017) Wage inequality in workers’ cooperatives and conventional firms. The European Journal of Comparative Economics14(2): 303–329.
27.
MarcolinLMiroudotSSquicciariniM (2019) To be (routine) or not to be (routine), that is the question: A cross-country task-based answer. Industrial and Corporate Change28(3): 477–501.
28.
MikamiKTanakaS (2010) Sunk costs of capital and the form of enterprise: Investor-owned firms and worker-owned firms. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics81(1): 77–104. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8292.2009.00406.x
29.
MirabelT (2021a) Past, present and future of empirical research on employee-owned firms: A structured literature review over 1970–2019. Journal of Participation and Employee Ownership4(1): 1–25.
30.
MirabelT (2021b) Survival advantage of worker buyouts over newly created worker-owned firms. Journal of Participation and Employee Ownership4(3): 212–234. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPEO-08-2021-0006
31.
MirabelT (2022) Performance and rarity of worker-owned firms: Empirical evidence from France. PhD Thesis, University of Paris Nanterre, France.
32.
MonteiroNPStraumeOR (2018) Are cooperatives more productive than investor-owned firms? Cross-industry evidence from Portugal. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics89(2): 377–414. https://doi.org/10.1111/apce.12201
33.
MygindNPoulsenT (2021) Employee ownership – pros and cons – a review. Journal of Participation and Employee Ownership4(2): 136–173.
34.
OldenskiL (2012) Export versus FDI and the communication of complex information. Journal of International Economics87(2): 312–322.
35.
OlsenEK (2013) The relative survival of worker cooperatives and barriers to their creation. In: KruseD(ed.) Advances in the Economic Analysis of Participatory & Labor-Managed FirmsVol. 14. Bingley: Emerald, pp. 83–107. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0885-3339(2013)0000014005
36.
PencavelJPistaferriLSchivardiF (2006) Wages, employment, and capital in capitalist and worker-owned firms. Industrial and Labor Relations Review60(1): 23–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/001979390606000102
37.
PérotinV (2006) Entry, exit, and the business cycle: Are cooperatives different?Journal of Comparative Economics34(2): 295–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jce.2006.03.002
38.
PodivinskyJMStewartG (2007) Why is labour-managed firm entry so rare?Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization63(1): 177–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2006.02.001
39.
TortiaEC (2021) Capital as common-pool resource: Horizon problem, financial sustainability and reserves in worker cooperatives. Journal of Co-operative Organization and Management9(2): 100137.
40.
VietaM (2020) Workers’ Self-Management in Argentina: Contesting Neo-Liberalism by Occupying Companies, Creating Cooperatives, and Recuperating Autogestión. Leiden: Brill.
41.
WardB (1958) The firm in Illyria: Market syndicalism. The American Economic Review48(4): 566–589.
42.
WilliamsonOE (1979) Transaction-cost economics: The governance of contractual relations. The Journal of Law and Economics22(2): 233–261.
