PERBEDAAN TEKNOLOGI PRODUKSI: IMPLIKASI PADA KONTEN FAKTOR PERDAGANGAN INDONESIA-AMERIKA SERIKAT
Abstract Views: 2329 |
PDF
Downloads: 2867
Downloads
Abstract
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk membandingkan teknologi produksi antara Amerika Serikat (AS) dan Indonesia, khususnya untuk mengestimasi intensitas faktor produksi pada perdagangan bilateral kedua negara berdasarkan persyaratan Leamer (1980). Model penelitian mengacu pada definisi konten faktor perdagangan dari Trefler & Zhu (2010) berdasarkan data World Input-Output Database (WIOD) yang diuji dengan asumsi teknologi sama dan pada saat teknologi berbeda. Dalam konten faktor perdagangan bilateral, upah pekerja AS 16 kali upah pekerja Indonesia, namun secara total, rata-rata akses modal tenaga kerja AS 23 kali rata-rata akses modal tenaga kerja Indonesia dan nilai tambah dari tenaga kerja di AS 35 kali lebih tinggi dibanding di Indonesia. Dengan memperhitungkan produktivitas faktor produksi berdasarkan nilai tambah tersebut, ternyata Indonesia padat modal dan AS padat karya; dan disimpulkan juga bahwa teknologi produksi yang digunakan di AS berbeda dengan di Indonesia. Selama 2000-2009, sebagian besar, yaitu sekitar 84,57% dari 35 sektor produksi yang diamati adalah padat modal. Untuk meningkatkan produktivitas tenaga kerja, penelitian ini merekomendasikan agar modal dan teknologi yang baru diprioritaskan ke sektor-sektor yang masih rendah produktivitasnya seperti sektor pertanian sehingga pada gilirannya akan menambah volume dan nilai tambah ekspor Indonesia.
This study aims to compare the production technology between the United States and Indonesia, especially to estimate the factor intensity of production on bilateral trade based on the Leamer’s requirements (1980). The research model refers to the definition of trade factor content of trade of Trefler and Zhu (2010) based on data from the World Input-Output Database (WIOD). The model was tested based on two technology assumptions, similar technology and different technology. On the bilateral trade factor content, the labor prices of the U.S. was 16 times than Indonesian; however in overall, the average of capital access per labor of the U.S. was 23 times than Indonesian and the labor productivity in the U.S. was 35 times higher than in Indonesia. By accounting the production factors productivity based on value-added in exportimport of goods and services, Indonesia is capital intensive and the U.S. is labor intensive; and the production technology used in the U.S. is unlike that one used in Indonesia. In the period of 2000-2009, the production sectors, which are classified as capital intensive are around 84.57 percent. To increase labor productivity, the study recommends that the new capital stocks and technology should be prioritized to the sectors that are still low in productivity such as agriculture, which in turn will increase the volume and exports value-added of Indonesia.
References
Bowen, H.P., Leamer, E. & Sveikauskas, L. (1987). Multicountry, Multifactor Tests of the Factor Abundance Theory. American Economic Review, 77(5), pp.791–809.
Case, K.E., Fair, R.C. & Oster, S.M. (2012). Principles of Economics, tenth ed., Pearson Education Inc.
Feenstra, R.C. (2004). Advanced International Trade : Theory and Evidence, Princenton University.
Foster-McGregor, N. & Stehrer, R. (2013). Value added content of trade: A comprehensive approach. Economics Letters, 120(2), pp.354–357.
Johnson, R.C. & Noguera, G. (2012). Accounting for intermediates: Production sharing and trade in value added. Journal of International Economics, 86(2), pp.224–236.
Lai, H. & Zhu, S.C. (2005). Technology, Endowments, and the Factor Content of Bilateral Trade. Journal of International Economics, 71, pp.389–409.
Leamer, E. (1980). The Leontief Paradox, Reconsidered. The Journal of Political Economy, 88(3), pp.495–503.
Leontief, W. (1953). Domestic Production and Foreign Trade; the American Capital Position Re-examined. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society.
Marshall, K.G. (2011). The Factor Content of Chinese Trade. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, 20(6), pp.769–787.
Maskus, K.E. & Nishioka, S. (2009). Development-Related Biases in Factor Productivities and the HOV Model of Trade. The Canadian Journal of Economics, 42(2), pp.519–553.
Nicholson, W. & Snyder, C. (2008). Microeconomics Theory Basic Principles and Extention, tenth ed., Thomson SouthWestern.
Nishioka, S. (2012). International Differences in Production Techniques: Implications for the Factor Content of Trade. Journal of International Economics, 87(1), pp.98–104.
Puzzello, L. (2012). A Proportionality Assumption and Measurement Biases in The Factor Content of Trade. Journal of International Economics, 87(1), pp.105–111.
Sitorus, B. (2013). Analisis Struktur Faktor Produksi Pada Perdagangan IndonesiaAustralia Periode 2000-2009. Tesis, Unpad, Bandung.
Timmer, M., Erumban, A., Arto, I. (2012). The World Input-Output Database (WIOD): Contents, Sources, and Methods., (April), pp.1–73.
Trefler, D. (1993). International Factor Price Differences: Leontief Was Right!. Journal of Political Economy, 101(6), pp.961–87.
Trefler, D. (1995). The Case of the Missing Trade and Other Mysteries. American Economic Review, 85(5 (December)), pp.1029–1046.
Trefler, D. & Zhu, S.C. (2010). The Structure of Factor Content Predictions. Journal of International Economics, 82(2), pp.195–207.
Vanek, J. (1968). The Factor Proportions Theory: The N-Factor Case. Kyklos, 21(4), 749–755. a)
WIOD. (2012). World Input-Output Database: Construction and Applications, FP7 Research Project, 2009-2012; www.wiod.org
Copyright (c) 2017 Buletin Ilmiah Litbang Perdagangan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Buletin Ilmiah Litbang Perdagangan
