1
$\begingroup$

Consider a model with the following production technology: \begin{equation} Q_i=F(\Omega_i,K_i,S_i,N_i) = \Omega_i\Big(\nu N_i^\sigma+(1-\nu)(\tau K_i^\rho+(1-\tau)S_i^\rho)^{\frac\sigma\rho}\Big)^{\frac1\sigma} \end{equation} Where $\Omega_i$ is the physical productivity, $K_{i}$ is the capital, $S_i$ the hours of skilled labor, and $N_i$, hours of unskilled labor.

The production function estimation procedure, according with De Loecker and Warzynski (2012), considers the logged production function:

$$q_{i}=f(s_{i},n_{i},k_{i};\gamma)+\omega_{i}+\varepsilon_{i}$$

where $q_i$ is logged value added, $s_{i}$ is logged skilled labor, $n_{i}$ is logged unskilled labor, $k_{i}$ is logged capital, $\gamma$ collects all coefficients, and $\omega_{i}$ is logged physical productivity (TFPQ).

The translog functional form for $f()$ is:

$$q_{i}=\gamma_{s}s_{i}+\gamma_{n}n_{i}+\gamma_{k}k_{i}+\sum_{x\in\{s,n,k\}}\gamma_{xx}x_{i}^{2}+\sum_{w\neq x}\sum_{x\in\{s,n,k\}}\gamma_{xw}x_{i}w_{i}+\omega_{i}+\varepsilon_{i}\label{I}\tag{I}$$

Which is equivalent to approximating $f()$ by a second-order polynomial in which all inputs, inputs squared, and interaction terms between all inputs are included in log form.

The $\gamma's$ can be derived and closed formulas can be found. For example: \begin{equation}\label{II}\tag{II} \gamma_k=(1-\nu)\tau, \quad \gamma_{n}=\nu, \quad ... \end{equation} We can also find formulas for the others $\gamma's$.

So, I have two questions:

  1. How can we show that the right side of equation (\ref{I}) is equivalent to approximating $f()$ by a second-order polynomial ?
  2. How can we get the expression for $\gamma_k$ given in (\ref{II})? Actually, I am interested in finding the formula for the 9 $\gamma's$, but to understand the derivation of one, it is enough for me to understand and derive the others.

I have not little experience in economics lectures, but I have bit more experience with mathematical analysis. What I learned is that the sencond order approximation is given by: $$f(x)\approx f(x_0)+f'(x_0)(x-x_0)+\frac{1}{2}f''(x_0)(x-x_0)^2.$$ Where $x= (s,n,k)$ and $x_0= (s_0,n_0,k_0)$

I think this would be a good starting point. Could you help me?

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Your question is related to this one: economics.stackexchange.com/questions/26144/… $\endgroup$
    – Bertrand
    Commented Sep 5 at 18:49
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thank you. Your answer to this question can help me a lot. The other answer, although it has more votes, is a bit strange. I couldn't quite understand the part that says "Now we expand $\ln Y$ around $\gamma=0$". $\endgroup$
    – PSE
    Commented Sep 5 at 19:46

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

To address your first question - let's break it down by showing both sides of the equivalent terms.

For a general function $ f(s_i, n_i, k_i) $, the second-order Taylor expansion is:

\begin{align*} f(s_i, n_i, k_i) &\approx f(s_0, n_0, k_0) + \frac{\partial f}{\partial s_i}(s_i - s_0) + \frac{\partial f}{\partial n_i}(n_i - n_0) + \frac{\partial f}{\partial k_i}(k_i - k_0) \\ &+ \frac{1}{2} \left( \frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial s_i^2}(s_i - s_0)^2 + \frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial n_i^2}(n_i - n_0)^2 + \frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial k_i^2}(k_i - k_0)^2 \right) \\ &+ \frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial s_i \partial n_i}(s_i - s_0)(n_i - n_0) + \frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial s_i \partial k_i}(s_i - s_0)(k_i - k_0) \\ &+ \frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial n_i \partial k_i}(n_i - n_0)(k_i - k_0) \end{align*}

Then the translog functional form: \begin{align*} q_{it} = \gamma_s s_i + \gamma_n n_i + \gamma_k k_i + \gamma_{ss} s_i^2 + \gamma_{nn} n_i^2 + \gamma_{kk} k_i^2 + \sum_{x \neq w \in \{s, n, k\}} \gamma_{xw} x_{it} w_{it} + \omega_{it} + \epsilon_{it} \end{align*}

All you need to do is compare the terms. For example, the constant term from the Taylor expansion $f(s_0, n_0, k_0)$ is equivalent to the constant term in the translog function representing the logged physical productivity.

You can the same for other terms as well.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I also think I found the paper you're using - "Financial development and labor market outcomes: Evidence from Brazil" by Julia Fonseca and Bernardus Van Doornik. Sadly after going through it, I am still not 100% clear on how the authors calculated each $\gamma$. The maths seems to get ugly really fast. There has to be some trick or simplifying assumption. $\endgroup$
    – bajun65537
    Commented Sep 5 at 11:34
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the answer. It's a bit confusing to understand $f(s_0,n_0,k_0)= f(\ln(S_0),\ln(N_0),\ln(K_0))$ related to productivity. Is there any economic justification for this? On the other hand, I think I can see an algebraic logic in the term $x_i \omega_i$. I think there's no other way but to do the math. I'll try and get back to you. $\endgroup$
    – PSE
    Commented Sep 5 at 19:40
  • $\begingroup$ Is it valid to do $(S_0,N_0,K_0)= (1,1,1)$ so that $(s_0,n_0,k_0) = (0,0,0)$ to make my calculations easier? $\endgroup$
    – PSE
    Commented Sep 5 at 20:28

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.