Cited by 777Global trade and economicsGlobal Trade and CompetitivenessInternational Business and FDI

Survival of the best fit: Exposure to low-wage countries and the (uneven) growth of U.S. manufacturing plants

Bernard, Andrew B., Jensen, J. Bradford, Schott, Peter K.·2006·Journal of International Economics

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jinteco.2005.06.002

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Industries more exposed to trade with China have seen higher exit of plants.

    “Industries more exposed to trade with China have seen higher exit of plants (Bernard, Jensen, and Schott 2006), larger contractions in employment (Pierce and Schott 2016; Acemoglu et al. 2016), and lower incomes for affected workers (Autor et al. 2014; Galle, Rodríguez-Clare, and Yi 2017; Caliendo, Dvorkin, and Parro 2019; Autor, Dorn, and Hanson 2019).”

    From Importing Political Polarization? The Electoral Consequences of Rising Trade Exposure (2020) · cites this paper as Bernard, Jensen, and Schott 2006

    Section 5.1 (p. 15) finds that plant death is more likely in industries with greater exposure to imports from low-wage countries. Section 3 (p. 9) includes China among those countries, but the reported result is for the group, not for exposure to trade with China specifically. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 18

  1. Blonigen, Bruce A. and KaSaundra Tomlin. 2001. Size and Growth of Japanese Plants in the United States. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 19(6):931-52.
  2. Davis, Steven J. and John Haltiwanger. 1992. Gross Job Creation, Gross Job Destruction, and Employment Reallocation. Quarterly Journal of Economics 107(3):819-863.
  3. Dunne, Timothy, Mark J. Roberts, and Larry Samuelson. 1988. Patterns of Firm Entry and Exit in U.S. Manufacturing Industries. Rand Journal of Economics 19(4):495-515.
  4. Dunne, Timothy, Mark J. Roberts, and Larry Samuelson. 1989. The Growth and Failure of U.S. Manufacturing Plants. Quarterly Journal of Economics 104(4):671-698.
  5. Feenstra, Robert C. 1994. New Product Varieties and the Measurement of International Prices. American Economic Review 84:157-177.
  6. Freeman, Richard and Lawrence Katz. 1991. Industrial Wage and Employment Determination in an Open Economy, in Immigration, Trade and the Labor Market, edited by John M. Abowd and Richard B. Freeman. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  7. Grossman, Gene. 1987. The Employment and Wage Effects of Import Competition. Journal of International Economic Integration 2(1):1-23.
  8. Hall, Bronwyn H. 1987. The Relationship Between Firm Size and Firm Growth in the U.S. Manufacturing Sector. Journal of Industrial Economics 35(4):583-606.
  9. Hopenhayn, Hugo. 1992a. Entry, Exit, and Firm Dynamics in Long Run Equilibrium. Econometrica 60(5):1127-1150.
  10. Hopenhayn, Hugo. 1992b. Exit, Selection and The Value of Firms. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 16:621-653.
  11. Krueger, Anne, O. 1980. 'Impact of Foreign Trade on Employment in U.S. Industry' edited by J. Bleck and B. Hindley, Current Issues in Commercial Policy and Diplomacy. New York: St Martin's Press.
  12. Leamer, Edward E. 1987. Paths of Development in the Three-Factor, nGood General Equilibrium Model. Journal of Political Economy 95:961999.
  13. Lerner, Abba. 1952. Factor Prices and International Trade. Economica 19(73):1-15.
  14. Mann, Catherine L. 1988. The Effects of Foreign Competition in Prices and Quantities on Employment in Import-Sensitive Industries. International Trade Journal II (Summer):409-444.
  15. Olley, Steven G. and Ariel Pakes. 1996. The Dynamics of Productivity in the Telecommunications Equipment Industry. Econometrica 64(6):1263-97.
  16. Revenga, Ana L. 1992. Exporting Jobs? The Impact of Import Competition on Employment and Wages in U.S. Manufacturing. Quarterly Journal of Economics 107(1):255-284.
  17. Sachs, Jeffrey D. and Howard J. Shatz. 1994. Trade and Jobs in U.S. Manufacturing. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 1994(1):1-69.
  18. Notes: Correlations are computed across industries and Census years (1977, 1982, 1987 and 1992) and control for time effects. All correlations except for real import price changes are significant at the 10% level. Correlations are for four-digit SIC industries (1533 observations) except for the import price correlation, which is based upon three-digit industries (92 observations). Import penetration is total import value divided by domestic absorption. OECD and Tiger value shares are the share of industry imports originating in OECD countries (except Mexico, Korea and newer entrants) and Asian tigers (Korea, Taiwan, Singapore and Hong Kong), respectively. Middle value shares are based upon the set of countries with the noted per capita GDP relative to the U.S. Three-digit SIC (1972 revision) import price indexes are from Feenstra (1996) and are deflated by the U.S. PPI. Import price changes are computed as the average annual change in the real index across Census years. The import price correlation is based upon an aggregation of VSH to threedigit industries.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bernard, A. B., Jensen, J. B., & Schott, P. K.
Affiliations
  • Dartmouth College (US)
  • Peterson Institute for International Economics (US)
  • National Bureau of Economic Research (US)
Corresponding author
Bernard, Andrew B.
Venue
Journal of International Economics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-01
Volume
68
Issue
1
Pages
219-237
ISSN
0022-1996 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2139804915
Cited by
777
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 41 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 54 · 2020: 57 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 36 · 2015: 38 · 2014: 41 · 2013: 71 · 2012: 40
FWCI
43.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of International Economics (publishedVersion)
  • London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • OpenGrey (Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › General Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Global trade and economics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Global Trade and Competitiveness
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › International Business and FDI
Keywords
international trade, plant growth, factor proportions, plant relocation, United States manufacturing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review