Economies Of Plant and Firm Size in the Unites States Pulp and Paper Industries
Keywords:Labor productivity, profitability, wages, survivor analysis
AbstractStatistics from the United States Bureau of the Census, census of manufacturers of 1972 for the pulp and paper industries, were analyzed with respect to labor productivity and profitability for evidence of economies of scale. In the pulp industry, profitability and productivity appeared to decrease sharply for mills with more than 500 employees. For paper and paperboard, productivity and profitability tended to level off or decline only slightly in mills with more than 500 employees. Only in the small building paper and paperboard industry did the largest mills exhibit the highest productivity. Integrated paper mills appeared more profitable than nonintegrated mills, but even the former revealed a limit to productivity gains resulting from increases in size. Employees in large mills received significantly higher wages and worked fewer overtime hours. Survivor data for pulp mills indicated a strong increase in the relative frequency of plants with 250 to 500 employees, and a large decrease in plants with 100 to 250 employees. For paper mills, a small increase in the relative number of plants with more than 250 employees was apparent. Survivor data for other industries were inconclusive. For the three largest industries, there was no evidence of economies of scale at the firm level offsetting the stagnation or decline of productivity in large plants. Size of plants appeared to explain most of the variation in productivity among firms.
Borts, G. H. 1968. The estimation of rail cost functions. In A. Zellner. Readings in economic statistics and econometrics. Little Brown and Co., Boston. 718 pp.nChristensen, L. R., and W. H. Greene. 1976. Economics of scale in U.S. electric power generation. J. Polit. Econ. 84(4):655-676.nDempsey, G. D. 1973. Toward growth in productivity. For. Prod. J. 23(4):12-14.nEklund, R., and M. Kirjasniemi. 1969. An approach to economic planning of forest industry integrates. Paper Trade J. 153(45):54.nEntrican, A. R. 1950. Quality v. quantity in New Zealand forestry and forest products. N.Z. J. For. 6(2):100-111.nFood and Agriculture Organization. 1973. Guide for planning pulp and paper enterprises. FAO Forestry and Forest Products Studies No. 18. FAO, Rome. 379 pp.nGorecki, P. K. 1978. Economics of scale and efficient plant size in Canadian manufacturing industries. Consumer and Corporate Affairs, Bureau of Competition Policy. Minister of Supply and Services, Canada. 111 pp.nGrant, R. 1978. Optimum is beautiful: small mills can work. Pulp Paper Int. 20(13):51-58.nGregory, G. R. 1972. Forest resource economics. Ronald Press Company, New York. 548 pp.nGuthrie, J. A. 1972. An economic analysis of the pulp and paper industry. Washington State University Press, Pullman, Washington. 235 pp.nKaiser, H. F., Jr. 1971. Productivity gains in forest products industries. For. Prod. J. 21(5):14-16.nKing, K. F. S. 1977. The political economy of pulp and paper. Unasylva 29(117):2-8.nLittle, A. D. 1977. Economic impacts of pulp and paper industry compliance with environmental regulations. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 620 pp.nMasters, S. H. 1969. An interindustry analysis of wages and plant size. Rev. Econ. Stat. 51:341-345nMichaels, B. 1979. Price without pride—an industry gets tagged with price fixing label. Pulp Paper 53(3):122-125.nMiller, E. M. 1978a. The extent of economics of scale: The effects of firm size on labor productivity and wage rates. South. Econ. J. 44(3):470-487.nMiller, E. M. 1978b. Size of firm and size of plant. South. Econ. J. 44(4):861-872.nRich, S. U. 1972. Small company strategy and the guerrilla warfare analogy. For. Prod. J. 22(10):9.nSandwell, P. R. 1960. Feasibility of small pulp and paper mill operation. Proceedings Fifth World Forestry Congress 3:1604-1608.nSaving, T. R. 1961. Estimation of optimum size of plant by the survivor technique. Quart. J. Econ. Nov. 1961:569-607.nSutton, W. R. J. 1973. The importance of size and scale in forestry and the forest industries. N.Z. J. For. 18(1):63-80.nUnited States Bureau of the Census. 1947, 1954, 1958, 1963, 1967, 1972. Census of Manufactures. U.S. Department of Commerce, Social and Economics Statistics Administration, Bureau of the Census. Washington, D.C.nWorrell, A. C. 1959. Economics of American forestry. John Wiley and Sons, New York. 441 pp.n
The copyright of an article published in Wood and Fiber Science is transferred to the Society of Wood Science and Technology (for U. S. Government employees: to the extent transferable), effective if and when the article is accepted for publication. This transfer grants the Society of Wood Science and Technology permission to republish all or any part of the article in any form, e.g., reprints for sale, microfiche, proceedings, etc. However, the authors reserve the following as set forth in the Copyright Law:
1. All proprietary rights other than copyright, such as patent rights.
2. The right to grant or refuse permission to third parties to republish all or part of the article or translations thereof. In the case of whole articles, such third parties must obtain Society of Wood Science and Technology written permission as well. However, the Society may grant rights with respect to Journal issues as a whole.
3. The right to use all or part of this article in future works of their own, such as lectures, press releases, reviews, text books, or reprint books.