评估数字化领导力:欧盟是否输给了美国?

IF 1.5 4区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS
Roman Stöllinger, Dario Guarascio
{"title":"评估数字化领导力:欧盟是否输给了美国?","authors":"Roman Stöllinger, Dario Guarascio","doi":"10.1007/s11079-024-09772-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Since Leontief’s (Leontief 1953) seminal work on the factor content of trade, the validity of the Heckscher-Ohlin-model has been judged not only on the basis of formal tests of the theory but also tested against prior expectation. In this vein, this paper uses the Heckscher-Ohlin-Vanek (HOV) approach to investigate whether supposed US leadership in the digital domain can be traced back to digital task endowments embodied in labour services. In a comparison between EU member states and the US, we find that the latter is more intensive in digital tasks than the EU and that this difference is explained by both an intensity-effect (US occupations being more digital-task intensive) and a structural component (relatively more digital-task intensive occupations). Viewed through the lens of the HOV theorem we find that the US is abundant in digital tasks relative to non-digital tasks, while the opposite is true for the EU. The standard tests for the predictive power of the HOV theorem are high and in line with the results for labour in previous literature.</p>","PeriodicalId":46980,"journal":{"name":"Open Economies Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing Digital Leadership: Is the EU Losing Out to the US?\",\"authors\":\"Roman Stöllinger, Dario Guarascio\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11079-024-09772-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Since Leontief’s (Leontief 1953) seminal work on the factor content of trade, the validity of the Heckscher-Ohlin-model has been judged not only on the basis of formal tests of the theory but also tested against prior expectation. In this vein, this paper uses the Heckscher-Ohlin-Vanek (HOV) approach to investigate whether supposed US leadership in the digital domain can be traced back to digital task endowments embodied in labour services. In a comparison between EU member states and the US, we find that the latter is more intensive in digital tasks than the EU and that this difference is explained by both an intensity-effect (US occupations being more digital-task intensive) and a structural component (relatively more digital-task intensive occupations). Viewed through the lens of the HOV theorem we find that the US is abundant in digital tasks relative to non-digital tasks, while the opposite is true for the EU. The standard tests for the predictive power of the HOV theorem are high and in line with the results for labour in previous literature.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46980,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Open Economies Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Open Economies Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11079-024-09772-7\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Economies Review","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11079-024-09772-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自从列昂惕夫(Leontief,1953 年)在贸易要素含量方面的开创性工作以来,人们不仅根据对理论的正式检验,还根据先前的预期来判断赫克歇尔-俄林模型的有效性。本着这一思路,本文使用赫克歇尔-俄林-瓦内克(HOV)方法来研究美国在数字领域的领先地位是否可以追溯到体现在劳动服务中的数字任务禀赋。在欧盟成员国与美国的比较中,我们发现后者的数字任务密集度高于欧盟,而这种差异既可以用密集度效应(美国的职业数字任务密集度更高)来解释,也可以用结构性因素(数字任务密集度相对较高的职业)来解释。从 HOV 理论的角度来看,我们发现美国的数字任务相对于非数字任务而言更为丰富,而欧盟的情况恰恰相反。对 HOV 理论预测能力的标准测试结果很高,与以往文献中有关劳动力的结果一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Assessing Digital Leadership: Is the EU Losing Out to the US?

Assessing Digital Leadership: Is the EU Losing Out to the US?

Since Leontief’s (Leontief 1953) seminal work on the factor content of trade, the validity of the Heckscher-Ohlin-model has been judged not only on the basis of formal tests of the theory but also tested against prior expectation. In this vein, this paper uses the Heckscher-Ohlin-Vanek (HOV) approach to investigate whether supposed US leadership in the digital domain can be traced back to digital task endowments embodied in labour services. In a comparison between EU member states and the US, we find that the latter is more intensive in digital tasks than the EU and that this difference is explained by both an intensity-effect (US occupations being more digital-task intensive) and a structural component (relatively more digital-task intensive occupations). Viewed through the lens of the HOV theorem we find that the US is abundant in digital tasks relative to non-digital tasks, while the opposite is true for the EU. The standard tests for the predictive power of the HOV theorem are high and in line with the results for labour in previous literature.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
16.70%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: The topics covered in Open Economies Review include, but are not limited to, models and applications of (1) trade flows, (2) commercial policy, (3) adjustment mechanism to external imbalances, (4) exchange rate movements, (5) alternative monetary regimes, (6) real and financial integration, (7) monetary union, (8) economic development and (9) external debt. Open Economies Review welcomes original manuscripts, both theoretical and empirical, dealing with international economic issues or national economic issues that have transnational relevance. Furthermore, Open Economies Review solicits contributions bearing on specific events on important branches of the literature. Open Economies Review is open to any and all contributions, without preferences for any particular viewpoint or school of thought. Open Economies Review encourages interdisciplinary communication and interaction among researchers in the vast area of international and transnational economics. Authors will be expected to meet the scientific standards prevailing in their respective fields, and empirical findings must be reproducible. Regardless of degree of complexity and specificity, authors are expected to write an introduction, setting forth the nature of their research and the significance of their findings, in a manner accessible to researchers in other disciplines. Officially cited as: Open Econ Rev
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信