Abstract:Overcapacity of specific industries, such as steel and coal, has been viewed as one of the most important and extensively discussed economic issues of China. The main feature of overcapacity is a massive amount of idling capacity, often considered to be a sub-optimal situation. The overcapacity of the steel industry is also closely related to low export price. Therefore, it turns out to be the most common fuse of trade disputes between China and developed economies, such as the U. S. and European Union. Since the late 1990s, the Chinese government has initiated five rounds of policies aiming to tackle with overcapacity. However, overcapacity keeps emerging periodically for some specific industries despite government's efforts. Since 2012, reducing overcapacity of particular industries has been listed as one of the primary economic goals of the Chinese government. By definition, overcapacity is a low level of capacity utilization. Therefore, the key to understanding overcapacity is to precisely measure capacity utilization rate. However, current methods of measurement, such as data envelopment analysis and stochastic production frontiers, are far from satisfaction because of either the concepts they use to define overcapacity or their underlying assumptions. Based on the definition of Greenwood et al. (1988 ) and the conceptual framework of Ackerberg et al. (2015) , we develop a new method to measure capacity utilization rate. We define the capacity utilization rate as capital utilization intensity and incorporate flexible capacity utilization rate into the production function estimation framework. Our underlying assumption is that higher capacity utilization leads to higher depreciation rate of capital. Thus, we can use capital depreciation rate as a proxy variable to estimate capacity utilization rate and total productivity factor simultaneously. Our method requires weaker assumptions, offers a more precise and intuitive characterization of overcapacity, and is more amenable to various extensions. Empirically, we apply our method to Chinese Industrial Enterprise Database. Collected and maintained by the National Bureau of Statistics, the database provides the most comprehensive micro-level information of Chinese industrial firms. It contains information on depreciation as well as inputs and outputs information for production function estimation. We estimate the capacity utilization rate and total factor productivity of Chinese industrial firms from 1998 to 2007 and from 2011 to 2013. Our results show that ignoring flexible capacity utilization would overestimate the elasticity of labor input on output and underestimate the elasticity of capital input. For most industries, this will lead to underestimation of firm-level productivity. Our results suggest that productivity of Chinese industrial firms has increased in the sample period. Compared with estimates of previous methods of capacity utilization, our estimates are much closer to the estimates obtained via direct investigation and more consistent with the macroeconomic background. Chinese industrial firms experienced an overall rise in capacity utilization rate from 1998 to 2007 and a drop around 2012. We also explored the variations in capacity utilization across firms. Firms with higher productivity, lower capital intensity, higher export intensity and profit ratio are associated with higher capacity utilization rate. Foreign-owned firms have the highest capacity utilization while state-owned enterprises have the lowest. We also observe substantial regional variations in capacity utilization across provinces. The policy implication of the results is that to tackle with overcapacity efficiently, policymakers should take into account the heterogeneity of overcapacity along different dimensions. The most important contribution of this paper lies in developing a new method of capacity utilization and utilization-adjusted total productivity factor. There are still a lot of controversies on the causes of and solutions to China's overcapacity problem. This paper tries to offer a benchmark framework to understand all these issues. We also provide some tentative and descriptive evidence to explore the variations in capacity utilization. Future research agenda concerning the mechanisms that give rise to overcapacity and the evaluation of related policies could be carried out based on the estimation strategy and results of this paper.

Output Quality, Productivity Growth, and Resource Reallocation

Industrial Productivity Performance in Chinese Regions (1987–2002): a Decomposition Approach

Input-Output Heterogeneity and Productivity Estimation of Chinese Manufacturing Enterprises: 1998—2013

Do Export Demand Shocks Affect the Export Quality of Multi‐product Firms? Evidence from China

The Performance of Industrial Productivity Across Regions of China: Structural Differences, Institutional Shocks and Dynamic Characteristics

Effects of Industrial Productivity Volatility on Resource Allocation

Productivity Performance and Investment Efficiency of China's Private Enterprises

Agglomeration Economy and China's Productivity Growth of Industries

INDUSTRIAL AND AGGREGATE MEASURES OF PRODUCTIVITY GROWTH IN CHINA, 1982–2000

Industrial Policy Intensity, Technological Change, and Productivity Growth: Evidence from China

New Quality Productivity and Industrial Structure in China: The Moderating Effect of Environmental Regulation

Product Churning, Reallocation, and Chinese Export Growth

New Quality Productivity Enabling High Quality Economic Development

Industrial Supporting Capabilities and Productivity

Capacity Utilization Rate Measurement and Productivity Estimation for Industrial Firms

Studies on How New Quality Productivity Drives High-Quality Development of Enterprises

Total Factor Productivity Performance of Chinese Enterprises

Measuring Green Productivity Growth of Chinese Industrial Sectors During 1998–2011

Productivity Growth-Accounting for Undesirable Outputs and Its Influencing Factors: The Case of China

Misallocation and the Growth of China’ s Industry

The Speed Type Profit Model and the Quality Type Profit Model:An Empirical Explanation of the Heterogeneity of Enterprises’ Performance