Blog Post

Europe’s export superstars

What has contributed to Germany's exceptional export performance compared to other European countries?

By: , and Date: July 14, 2015 Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy

Germany is ‘Exportweltmeister’ (world champion in exporting) as it is phrased by the German media. Between 2000 and 2013 German exports increased by 154 percent compared to 127 percent in Spain, 98 percent in the UK, 79 percent in France and 72 percent in Italy. In addition, no other European country saw such a quick rebound in export growth after the financial crisis in 2009 as Germany. As a result, many observers see Germany as a leading role model of successful adjustment from the ‘sick man of Europe’ in the 2000s to an economic powerhouse today. What has contributed to this exceptional export performance of Germany compared to other European countries?

Wage Restraint

The two leading explanations for Germany’s superb export performance are wage restraint and the emergence of China. And indeed, wage bargaining among the social partners resulted in an increase in nominal wages and salaries in Germany of only 19 percent between 2000 and 2008, the lowest increase in the European Union (in Spain nominal wages increased by 48 percent during the same period).

However, since 2009 nominal wages started to rise again in Germany. From 2009 to 2013 German nominal wages increased by over 14 percent compared to 4 percent in Spain. In spite of this rapid rise in nominal wages, German exports rebounded quickly compared to other European countries. Thus, wage restraint cannot be the full answer.

The Rise of China

Has Germany benefited more from the opening up of China compared to other European countries? This indeed appears to be the case. In the five years after the financial crisis, German exports to China almost doubled, a stronger increase than in any other European country. There are two possible channels through which China may have benefited exports in European countries.

First, China may have become an important sourcing region lowering the production costs of European exporters. Our analysis of the sourcing pattern of European exporters indicates however, that the biggest gainers from sourcing in China were the UK and Austria. UK exporters, who offshored to China, almost doubled their export market share to the world, while Austria’s exporters increased their export market share  by 70 percent compared to exporters, in these two countries, which did not offshore to China. In contrast, for the export market share of Spanish, German, and French exporters, sourcing from China was only marginally important. Thus, the spectacular success of German exporters appears not to be based on access to cheap inputs from the Chinese market.

Figure 1: export market share and sourcing to china

Note: Median firms’ export value/total imports of the world for the firm specific set of industries.

Second, the rapid modernization of China may have favored particularly Germany’s exports with its comparative advantage in machinery, transport equipment and other manufactured goods. The data seem to support this. However, other European countries, such as France and Italy, also have a large base in transport and manufacturing goods. Therefore, the question remains: why have the Chinese such a love for German goods?

The Firm Organisation of Export Superstars

In order to get to an answer to this question we want to go deeper and examine the export business model which European firms have pursued to compete on world markets. We focus on two adjustments in firm organisation that may help exporting firms to meet competitive pressures from foreign rivals. Offshoring production to low wage countries reduce costs and allows exporting firms to compete on prices. Decentralized management provides incentives to workers for product improvements, which enables exporters to compete on quality. The idea here is that workers at lower levels of the firm hierarchy are better informed on what the market demands. Giving these workers more autonomy in decision making will provide them with incentives to adapt the product characteristics with what customers demand.[1]

We explore the organisational responses to competition of 14.000 firms in seven European countries. The analysis is based on the EFIGE data which we merge with Bureau van Dijk’s Amadeus database in order to get detailed balance sheet and industry information. Aggregate trade data at the industry level is obtained via WITS from the UN Comtrade database. To assess the competitiveness at the firm level we construct the export market share of the export superstars in Europe, the top 1 percent of exporters in terms of export value in each country accounting between 20% and 55% of total exports in the respective country.[2] What type of organization do these firms choose to become superstars in world markets?  Did these firms do significantly better when using the firm organization as a competitive tool? Figure 2 reports the answer. [3]

Germany’s export superstars more than double their export market share in the world (from 1.6% to 3.5%) when they operate with decentralized management rather than not using the organization as a competitive tool (compare the export market share of the dec-exporters with the none-exporters in Figure 2). The top 1% of exporters which abstain from any organizational adjustment (the none-exporters in the figure) do very badly in all countries except perhaps Italy.  Austria’s export superstars rely exclusively on decentralized management. Italian and UK top exporters rely exclusively on offshoring (off-exporters in Figure 2), while French and Spanish exporters combine offshoring with decentralized management (both-exporters in Figure 2) to compete on world markets. From Figure 2 a distinct pattern emerges: German export superstars base their export business model on quality by relying on decentralized management. Germany shares this feature with Austria, while all other European countries base their export business model on price by offshoring production to low wage countries with or without a care for quality.

Figure 2: export market share of top 1% of exporters in percent

Notes: Export market share: Average firm’s export value/total imports of the world for the firm specific set of industries. Top exporters are defined in terms of export value. none: neither decentralized nor offshoring, dec: decentralized firm, off: offshoring firm, both: decentralized and offshoring firm (categories are mutually exclusive). A firm is an offshoring firm if it has purchased inputs from abroad. A firm is a decentralized firm if managers can take strategic decisions autonomously in some business areas.

Product Quality: A subjective measure

We turn now to assess the product quality of exports across European countries. We use a subjective measure of product quality as perceived by the firms. Firms ranked the quality of their export goods relative to the market average in the range between 0 and 100. We define a good to be of top quality if it is ranked by the firms as 100. We report the results in Figure 3. Austria and Germany stand out. About 40 percent of exporters offer top quality goods relative to the market average in the respective country. In France only 10 percent of exporters have top quality goods.

Figure 3: top quality exports in percents of firms

Next, we want to know whether decentralized management has, indeed, contributed to the pattern of quality across countries. This will be the case if decentralized management leads to an increase in the export market share of top quality goods. We report the results in Figure 4.

Figure 4: export market share by top quality exporters (in per mille)

none: neither decentralized nor offshoring, dec: decentralized firm, off: offshoring firm, both: decentralized and offshoring firm (categories are mutually exclusive). A firm is an offshoring firm if it has purchased inputs from abroad. A firm is a decentralized firm if managers can take strategic decisions autonomously in some business areas.

German exporters impressively demonstrate that decentralized management can provide incentives for product quality. German exporters increase their export market share of top quality goods by a factor of almost 3, from 0.07 per mille of the median exporter to 0.2 per mille when they operate with a decentralized less hierarchical organisation. Spanish and British exporters also somewhat boost their export market share of high quality goods, while Austrian and French exporters do not improve product quality when they decentralize.

Product Quality: A measure of price vulnerability 

An alternative measure for product quality is the ability of firms to raise their price without losing too much of their customers to competitors. This is captured by the elasticity of substitution between different varieties of the same good. It measures the percentage decline in the demand for a Volkswagen car when e.g. Renault lowers its price by 1 percent. Presumably, Volkswagen will experience less of a decline for its cars in response to a price reduction by Renault if it is of high quality. We use this to rank the industries by the size of the elasticity of substitution as estimated by Broda, Greenfield and Weinstein (2006). We define a good to be differentiated, responding only little to price changes, if the elasticity of substitution falls in the bottom 10 percent range. We define a good to be homogenous, responding strongly to price changes, if the elasticity of substitution falls in the top 10 percent range.

We now ask whether exporters of differentiated goods defined in this way can boost their export market share by significantly more when they operate with a decentralized organization. We report the result in Figure 5.  We find that only British and German exporters boost their export market share of differentiated goods when they use decentralized management. Spanish, French and Italian exporters have to use both organizational margins to increase their exports of differentiated goods.

Figure 5: export market share of differentiated goods (in per mille)

Notes: Export market share is the median firm’s export value/total imports of the world. Homogeneous goods: elasticity of substitution is in the top 10 percent range. Differentiated goods: elasticity of substitution is in the bottom 10 percent range.

Conclusion

What explains Germany’s exceptional export performance relative to other European countries? We find that Germany is a world champion in exporting because it is a world champion in organizing. The export superstars of Germany base their export business model on quality by operating with a decentralized less hierarchical organization which empowers workers at lower levels of the firm hierarchy. As a result 40 percent of German exporters sell top quality export goods. Decentralized management has been effective to increase the export market share of top quality goods in Germany which demonstrates that decentralizing the organization may actually work to improve the product quality of exporters. Austria shares many of these features with Germany, while the superstars of all other European countries base their export business model mainly on price with or without a care for quality. The focus on quality may explain why export growth in Germany and Austria rebounded quickly after 2009 in spite of rapid rising nominal wages.

References

Bernard, Andrew B., J. Bradford Jensen, Stephen J. Redding, and Peter K. Schott (2007) ‘Firms in International Trade’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(3): 105-130

Broda, Christian, Joshua Greenfield, David Weinstein (2006) ‘From Groundnuts to Globalization: A Structural Estimate of Trade and Growth’, NBER Working Papers 12512

Marin, Dalia (2010) ‘Germany’s Super Competitiveness: A Helping Hand from Eastern Europe’, VoxEU, June 20

Marin, Dalia and Thierry Verdier (2008) ‘Competing in Organisations: Firm Heterogeneity and International Trade’, In: Elhanan Helpman, Dalia Marin, Thierry Verdier (Eds.) (2008), The Organisation of Firms in a Global Economy, Harvard University Press.

Marin, Dalia, Thierry Verdier (2014) ‘Corporate Hierarchies and International Trade: Theory and

Evidence’, Journal of International Economics, 94(2): 295-310

Marin, Dalia, Jan Schymik, Jan Tscheke (2015) ‘Organisations as Competitive Advantage’, University of Munich, Mimeo.

Mayer, Thierry, Gianmarco I. P. Ottaviano (2007) ‘The Happy Few: The Internationalisation of European firms’, Blueprint Series 3, Bruegel


[1] For a model, see Marin, Schymik, Tscheke (2015).  Marin and Verdier (2008, 2014) show that a more competitive trade environment leads firms to decentralize decision making to lower levels of the firm hierarchy. They find that firms decentralize in particular those decisions for which workers’ effort is most important, such as the decision over R&D and the decision to introduce a new product.

[2] It is a well-documented fact that only a few firms do all the exporting in countries, see Bernard et al (2007) for the US and Mayer and Ottaviano (2007) for Europe.

[3] We report correlations. In Marin, Schymik Tscheke (2015) we show that the causality runs from the organisation to the export market share.

For the full detailed analysis and data included in this blog read the Bruegel Working Paper Europe’s export superstars – it’s the organisation! from the same authors.


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.

View comments
Read about event

Upcoming Event

Sep
3-4
08:30

Bruegel Annual Meetings 2018

The 2018 Annual Meetings will be held on 3-4 September and will feature sessions on European and global economic governance, as well as finance, energy and innovation.

Speakers: Maria Åsenius, Richard E. Baldwin, Carl Bildt, Maria Demertzis, Lowri Evans, Mariya Gabriel, Péter Kaderják, Joanne Kellermann, Jörg Kukies, Emmanuel Lagarrigue, Philippe Lespinard, Montserrat Mir Roca, Dominique Moïsi, Jean Pierre Mustier, Ana Palacio, Jean Pisani-Ferry, Lucrezia Reichlin, Norbert Röttgen, André Sapir, Jean-Claude Trichet, Johan Van Overtveldt, Martin Sandbu, Margrethe Vestager, Reinhilde Veugelers, Thomas Wieser, Guntram B. Wolff and Georg Zachmann Topic: Energy & Climate, European Macroeconomics & Governance, Finance & Financial Regulation, Global Economics & Governance, Innovation & Competition Policy Location: Brussels Comic Strip Museum, Rue des Sables 20, 1000 Brussels
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

Is Europe America’s Friend or Foe?

Since Donald Trump took office as US president, a new cottage industry in rational theories of his seemingly irrational behavior has developed. On one issue, however, no amount of theorizing has made sense of Trump: his treatment of America's oldest and most reliable ally.

By: Jean Pisani-Ferry Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: July 30, 2018
Read about event More on this topic

Upcoming Event

Oct
3
09:00

International trade and the EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement

This event; jointly organised by Bruegel and the Graduate School of Economics, Kobe University, will discuss the EU-Japan trade deal and asses its impact.

Speakers: Marco Chirullo, Gabriel Felbermayr, François Godement, Hiroo Inoue, Sébastien Jean, Yoichi Matsubayashi, Tamotsu Nakamura, André Sapir, Cécile Toubeau, Agata Wierzbowska and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Global Economics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels
Read about event

Upcoming Event

Oct
11-12
20:00

Policy responses for an EU-MENA shared future

In the third edition of the "Platform for Advanced & Emerging Economies Policy Dialogue" we will discuss trade flows and trade policy between Europe and MENA, integration of developing economies into global value chains, and regional energy relations.

Speakers: Karim El Aynaoui and Guntram B. Wolff Location: Rome
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

World Cup Economics

As we approach the final rounds of the tournament, here are some recent contributions about the economics and economic impact of the World Cup.

By: Silvia Merler Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: July 9, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

Ubu ou Machiavel?

L'administration Trump veut imposer une approche transactionnelle des relations économiques gouvernée par le rapport de force bilatéral en lieu et place du contrat multilatéral. Un défi d'une ampleur inédite pour l'Europe.

By: Jean Pisani-Ferry Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: July 6, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Opinion

Can Multilateralism Adapt?

Global governance requires rules, because flexibility and goodwill alone cannot tackle the hardest shared problems. With multilateralism under attack, the narrow path ahead is to determine, on a case-by-case basis, the minimum requirements of effective collective action, and to forge agreement on reforms that fulfill these conditions.

By: Jean Pisani-Ferry Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: July 3, 2018
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

US tariffs and China's holding of Treasuries

China has the biggest bilateral trade surplus vis-à-vis the US but is also a top holder of US government bonds. While China has started to counteract US trade tariffs, economists have been discussing the case of China acting on its holdings of US Treasuries. We review recent contributions.

By: Silvia Merler Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: July 2, 2018
Read article

Blog Post

Trading invisibles: Exposure of countries to GDPR

This blog post identifies provisions of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) that affect foreign companies, and discusses implications for trade in services with the EU. The authors provide a novel mapping of countries’ relative exposure to these regulations by a) measuring the digital maturity of their service exports to the EU; and b) the share of these exports in national GDP.

By: Sonali Chowdhry and Nicolas Moës Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, Global Economics & Governance Date: June 28, 2018
Read about event More on this topic

Past Event

Past Event

Trade war trinity: analysis of global consequences

Analysis of the long-term impact of the trade war and its three key players: EU, US, and China.

Speakers: Alicia García-Herrero, Ignasi Guardans and Carl B Hamilton Topic: Global Economics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: June 28, 2018
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

China’s strategic investments in Europe: The case of maritime ports

The EU is currently working on a new framework for screening foreign direct investments (FDI). Maritime ports represent the cornerstone of the EU trade infrastructure, as 70% of goods crossing European borders travel by sea. This blog post seeks to inform this debate by looking at recent Chinese involvement in EU ports.

By: Shivali Pandya and Simone Tagliapietra Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: June 27, 2018
Read about event More on this topic

Past Event

Past Event

EU-LAC Economic Forum 2018

The second edition of the EU-LAC Economic Forum, a high level gathering for in-depth research-based exchanges on economic issues between European, Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) policy makers and experts.

Speakers: Angel Badillo, Federico Bonaglia, Maria Demertzis, Sylvie Durán, Guillermo Fernández de Soto, Alicia García-Herrero, Elisa Grafulla, Gonzalo Gutiérrez, Bert Hoffmann, Juan Jung, Emilio Lamo de Espinosa, Carlos Malamud, J. Scott Marcus, Neven Mimica, Fabio Nasarre de Letosa, Detlef Nolte, Anne Sperschneider and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: Global Economics & Governance Location: Bruegel, Rue de la Charité 33, 1210 Brussels Date: June 26, 2018
Load more posts