The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Empirical Implications of Alternative Models of Firm Dynamics
Open accessAbstract
This paper considers two models for analyzing the dynamics of firm behavior that allow for heterogeneity among firms, idiosyncratic (or firmspecific) sources of uncertainty, and discrete outcomes (exit and/or entry).Models with these characteristics are needed for the structural econometric analysis of several economic phenomena, including the behavior of capital markets when there are significant failure probabilities, and the analysis of productivity movements in industries with large amounts of entry and exit.In addition, these models provide a means of correcting for the self-section induced by liquidation decisions in empirical studies of firms responses to alternative policy and environmental changes.It is shown that the two models have different nonparametric implications -implications that depend only on baaic behavioral assumptions and mild regularity conditions on the functional forms of interest (one distinction between them corresponds to the distinction between heterogeneity and an ergodic form of state-dependence; a form in which the effect of being in a state in a particular period erodes away as time from that period lapses).The nonparametric implications enable the construction of testing and selection correction procedures that are easy to implement (they do not require the computstionslly difficult, and functional-form specific, estimation algorithms that have been used to empirically analyze stochastic control models with discrete outcomes in the past).The paper concludes by checking for the implications of the two models on an eight-year panel of Wisconsin firms.We find one model to be consistent with the data for retail trade.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Good News and Bad News: Representation Theorems and Applications
Milgrom, P. R. (1981) · The Bell Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/3003562 · Cited by 3,123
Cited by
Some Empirical Aspects of Entrepreneurship
Evans, D. S., & Leighton, L. S. (1990) · Studies in Industrial Organization · doi:10.1007/978-94-015-7854-7_6 · Cited by 1,120
Henderson, R. (1993) · The RAND Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/2555761 · Cited by 1,015
What's New about the New Economy? Sources of Growth in the Managed and Entrepreneurial Economies
Audretsch, D. B. (2001) · Industrial and Corporate Change · doi:10.1093/icc/10.1.267 · Cited by 986
Brock, W. A., & Evans, D. S. (1989) · Small Business Economics · doi:10.1007/bf00389913 · Cited by 894
Does Entry Size Matter? The Impact of the Life Cycle and Technology on Firm Survival
Agarwal, R., & Audretsch, D. B. (2001) · The Journal of Industrial Economics · doi:10.1111/1467-6451.00136 · Cited by 586
Metadata
- Authors
- Pakes, A., & Ericson, R.
- Venue
- National Bureau of Economic Research
- Publisher
- National Bureau of Economic Research
- Published
- 1989-03
- OpenAlex
- W2071908546
- Cited by
- 163
- References
- 1
- Type
- report
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Empirical Implications of Alternative Models of Firm Dynamics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3386/w2893
- The paper
- Pakes, A., & Ericson, R. (1989). Empirical Implications of Alternative Models of Firm Dynamics. National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w2893
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.