The article utilizes data on high-tech Indian firms for 1996–2007 to explain the association between leverage and productivity. Accordingly, firm-level productivity measures are regressed on a set of control variables, which includes leverage among the regressors. The findings suggest that low leveraged firms tend to be more productive, on average. Robustness tests support the results.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aghion, P. and P. Bolton . 1992. ‘ An Incomplete Contract Approach to Financial Contracting ’, Review of Economic Studies, 59(4): 473–94 .
2.
Aghion, P. , A. Klemm , S. Bond , and I. Marinescu . 2004. ‘ Technology and Financial Structure: Are Innovative Firms Different? ’, Journal of the European Economic Association, 2(2): 277–88 .
3.
Arora, Ashish . 2006. Shaping the Twentieth Century: The Remarkable Story of the Evolution of the Modern Chemical and Pharmaceutical Industries. By Alfred D. Chandler Jr. Cambridge, MA, and London: Harvard University Press , The Journal of Economic History, 66(3), 266–68 .
4.
Arora, A. and J. Asundi . 1999. ‘Quality Certification and the Economics of Contract Software Development: A Study of Indian Software Industry’, NBER Working Paper 7260. Cambridge: MA .
5.
Athreye, S.2005. ‘The Indian Software Industry’, in A. Arora and A. Gambardella (eds) From Underdogs to Tigers: The Rise and Growth of the Software Industry. Oxford: Oxford University Press .
6.
Bradley, M. , Jarrrell G. , and E.H. Kim . 1984. ‘ On the Existence of an Optimal Capital Structure: Theory and Evidence ’, Journal of Finance, 39(3): 857–78 .
7.
Castanias, R.1983. ‘ Bankruptcy Risk and Optimal Capital Structure ’, Journal of Finance, 38: 1617–35 .
8.
Centre for Monitoring of Indian Economy. 2007. Prowess database (Release 3.0). CMIE: Mumbai .
9.
Criscuolo, C. 2006. Does Ownership Structure affect Productivity: Evidence from the UK. Unpublished. University College, London.
10.
Faulkender, M. and M. Petersen . 2006. ‘ Does the Source of Capital affect the Capital Structure? ’, Review of Financial Studies, 19(1), 45–79 .
11.
Geroski, P. , T. Kretschmer and C. Walters . 2008. ‘ Corporate Productivity Growth: Champions, Leaders and Laggards ’, Economic Inquiry (forthcoming).
12.
Ghosh, S.2009. ‘ R&D in Indian Manufacturing: What Shapes it? ’, Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 18(3): 337–52 .
13.
Government of India. 2008. Economic Survey. Government of India: New Delhi .
14.
Grilliches, Z. and F. Lichtenberg . 1984. ‘R&D and Productivity Growth at Industry Level: Is there still a Relationship?’, in Z. Grilliches (ed.) R&D, Patents and Productivity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press .
15.
Harris, M. and A. Raviv . 1990. ‘ Capital Structure and the Informational Role of Debt ’, Journal of Finance, 45(3): 321–50 .
16.
Harris, M. and A. Raviv . 1991. ‘ The Theory of the Capital Structure ’, Journal of Finance, 46(1): 297–355 .
17.
Hart, O.1995. Firms, Contracts and Financial Structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press .
18.
Heeks, R.1998. ‘Information Age Reform of the Public Sector: The Potential and Problems of IT in India’, IDPM Working Paper No. 6, University of Manchester: UK .
19.
Ikhsan-Modjo, M.2006. ‘Total Factor Productivity in Indonesian Manufacturing: A Stochastic Frontier Approach’, Monash University Discussion Paper No. 28, Monash University, Australia .
20.
Jensen, M. , and W. Meckling1976. ‘ Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure ’, Journal of Financial Economics, 4(4): 305–60 .
21.
Kagami, M. and M. Tsuji . 2001. The IT Revolution and Developing Countries: Late-comer Advantage?Chiba (Japan), Institute for Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization .
22.
Klepper, S.1996. ‘ Entry, Exit, Growth and Innovation Over the Product life Cycle ’, American Economic Review, 86(2): 562–83 .
23.
Levinsohn, J. and A. Petrin . 2003. ‘ Estimating Production Functions Using Inputs to Control for Unobservables ’, Review of Economic Studies, 70(3): 317–42 .
24.
Margaritis, D. and M. Psillaki . 2007. ‘ Capital Structure and Firm Efficiency ’, Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 34(5): 1447–69 .
25.
Myers, S.2001. ‘ Capital Structure ’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15(1): 81–102 .
26.
Myers, S.1977. ‘ Determinants of Corporate Borrowing ’, Journal of Financial Economics, 5(2): 147–75 .
27.
Myers, S. and N. Majluf . 1984. ‘ Corporate Financing and Investment Decisions when Firms have Information Investors do not have ’, Journal of Financial Economics, 13(2): 187–221 .
28.
Olley, G. and A. Pakes . 1996. ‘ The Dynamics of Productivity in the Telecommunications Equipment Industry ’, Econometrica, 64(4): 1263–97 .
29.
Rajan, R.G. and L. Zingales . 1995. ‘ What Do We Know about Capital Structure? Some Evidence from International Data ’, Journal of Finance, 50(4): 1421–60 .
30.
Shleifer, A. and R. Vishny . 1997. ‘ A Survey of Corporate Governance ’, Journal of Finance, 52(3): 737–84 .
31.
Smith, C. and J. Warner . 1979. ‘ On Financial Contracting: An Analysis of Bond Covenants ’. Journal of Financial Economics, 7(1): 117–61 .
32.
Titman, S. and R. Wessels . 1988. ‘ The Determinants of Capital Structure Choice ’, Journal of Finance, 43(1): 1–19 .
33.
Unel, B.2003. ‘Productivity Trends in Indian Manufacturing during the Last Two Decades’ IMF Working Paper No. 02. IMF: Washington DC .
34.
Van Beveren, I.2007. ‘Total Factor Productivity Estimation: A Practical Review’, LICOS Discussion Paper No. 182, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium .
