TY - JOUR
T1 - The effect of restructuring on US coal mining labor productivity, 1980-1995
AU - Kuby, Michael
AU - Xie, Z.
N1 - Funding Information:
This research was funded by the Office of Integrated Analysis and Forecasting, USEIA. The authors would like to thank the EIA's Ed Flynn, Michael Mellish, Richard Newcombe, and Inderjit Kundra, who helped to frame the issues studied here. We would also like to thank three anonymous reviewers and the editor for their helpful comments.
Copyright:
Copyright 2017 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2001/11
Y1 - 2001/11
N2 - From 1980 to 1995, labor productivity in US coal mining almost tripled due to heightened competition, improved labor relations, scale economies, technological change, chronic oversupply, and industry restructuring that halved the number of mines. This paper uses EIA-7A data to analyze the hypothesis that productivity growth may have been caused by closure of small inefficient mines rather than improvement of existing mines, which if true could signal slower future growth. The hypothesis is evaluated using descriptive statistics and histograms of productivity over time, and by analyzing productivity for subsets of mines based on their longevity - including a subset of continuously operating mines unchanged by mine closures. Both methods strongly indicate that productivity growth has not just been the result of attrition of low-productivity mines or an artifact of the shift of production to high-productivity western surface mines. Rather, the evidence shows that in most regions and for most mining methods, both continually existing and new mines have improved steadily. Other factors are discussed, but continued productivity improvement is expected.
AB - From 1980 to 1995, labor productivity in US coal mining almost tripled due to heightened competition, improved labor relations, scale economies, technological change, chronic oversupply, and industry restructuring that halved the number of mines. This paper uses EIA-7A data to analyze the hypothesis that productivity growth may have been caused by closure of small inefficient mines rather than improvement of existing mines, which if true could signal slower future growth. The hypothesis is evaluated using descriptive statistics and histograms of productivity over time, and by analyzing productivity for subsets of mines based on their longevity - including a subset of continuously operating mines unchanged by mine closures. Both methods strongly indicate that productivity growth has not just been the result of attrition of low-productivity mines or an artifact of the shift of production to high-productivity western surface mines. Rather, the evidence shows that in most regions and for most mining methods, both continually existing and new mines have improved steadily. Other factors are discussed, but continued productivity improvement is expected.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0035501434&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0035501434&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S0360-5442(01)00051-2
DO - 10.1016/S0360-5442(01)00051-2
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:0035501434
SN - 0360-5442
VL - 26
SP - 1015
EP - 1030
JO - Energy
JF - Energy
IS - 11
ER -