A Reply to Campbell and Mau

• Nicholas Bloom ^[1] ; Mirko Draca ^[2] ; John Van Reenen ^[3]
  1. [1] Stanford University

     Stanford University

     Estados Unidos

     
  2. [2] University of Warwick

     University of Warwick

     Reino Unido

     
  3. [3] London School of Economics

  Mostrar afiliaciones +
• Localización: Review of economic studies, ISSN 0034-6527, Vol. 88, Nº 5, 2021, págs. 2560-2563
• Idioma: inglés
• Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
• Resumen

  • In Bloom et al. (2016, Bloom, Draca and Van Reenen (BDVR)), we have a set of nine results on the impact of Chinese trade. The first three showed that Chinese trade increased technical change in European firms measured by patents, productivity, and the adoption of Information Technology (IT). The last six showed that Chinese trade led to reallocation towards more technologically advanced firms: those with more patents, higher productivity and IT adoption had faster growth and lower exit rates. Campbell and Mau (2020, “CM”) argue that one of these results, the effect of Chinese imports on patenting, is sensitive to specification changes. This article focuses on CM’s critique of our count data models—we discuss other aspects of CM in a longer response.1