14  Monthly Labor Review • September 2012

Producer Price Index

The behavior of the Producer 

Price Index in a global economy

The relationship between industry price change and the globalization 

levels of import penetration and net import penetration was negatively significant in both 1997 and 2002; however, between export 

intensity and domestic price change, a corresponding relationship was 

not consistent

Maureen P. Doherty

Maureen P. Doherty is Chief of 

the Branch of Index Methods and 

Analysis, Division of Industrial 

Prices and Price Indexes, Office 

of Prices and Living Conditions. 

Email: Doherty.Maureen@bls.gov.

Over the last 20 years, the U.S. 

economy has become increasingly global. This trend was 

particularly strong in the manufacturing 

sector where, based on current dollar figures, imports as a percentage of domestic 

supply of manufacturing products grew 

from 14.3 percent in 1987 to 27.3 percent 

in 2010, while exports as a percentage of 

total manufacturing output grew from 8.2 

percent to 17.3 percent over the same period.1

 Values of these measures and other 

statistics2

 indicating the magnitude and 

growth of globalization for each year from 

1997 to 2002 can be found in appendix A.

The Producer Price Index (PPI) measures the average changes in prices that 

domestic establishments receive for their 

output. When a producer agrees to report 

prices for the PPI, a set of unique items 

with corresponding terms of sale (for 

example, type of buyer, size of shipment, 

etc.) is selected using probability proportional to size (PPS). As a result, the PPI includes export prices in its product indexes 

to the extent they are selected during this 

PPS process.3

 As of January 2011, only 2.2 

percent of the weight value of all manufacturing items included in the PPI reflected 

transactions for items sold only to foreign 

buyers or to foreign buyers at a different 

price than the same items sold to domestic buyers. An additional 13.7 percent of the 

manufacturing item weight reflected transactions for items producers sold to both domestic 

and foreign buyers at the same price. Although 

these percentages are based on proportions of 

weight value of all PPI manufacturing items 

rather than on proportions of all manufacturing output, they are comparable to the values 

in the previous paragraph, indicating that exports are included in the PPI sample in roughly 

the same proportions as they currently exist in 

the economy for manufacturing industries. The 

PPI does not price imports, since they are not 

the output of a domestic establishment.

Despite that the scope of the PPI limits its 

direct pricing of global transactions, in order 

to remain competitive, domestic firms may 

consider global demand and supply factors 

when they set prices. As a result, the PPI may 

indirectly reflect the impact of changes in 

imports and exports. The goal of this article 

is to present the results of a new approach to 

analyzing the behavior of domestic prices in a 

global economy.

The relationship between industry prices 

and globalization levels has been the subject 

of a number of studies that primarily focused 

on imports. Auer and Fischer examined the 

impact of imports from low-wage countries on 

U.S. inflation rates by using data from 1997 to 

2006 in 325 six-digit North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)

4

 manufac-
Monthly Labor Review • September 2012  15

turing industries.5 The results of this study indicated 

that imports from these low-wage countries decreased 

U.S. manufacturing prices by about 2 percent each year 

over the study period. Chen, Imbs, and Scott investigated how increases in trade affected prices in eight 

European countries.6

 They used data from 21 aggregate manufacturing industries sectors from 1988 to 

2000. Their results estimated that European Union 

manufacturing prices fell by 2.3 percent over the period because of an increase in imports. In another study, 

Thompson calculated price-marginal cost ratios at the 

three-digit Standard Industrial Classification level for 

two time periods in the early and late 1970s by using 

Canadian manufacturing establishment level data and 

related those price-marginal cost ratios to trade data for 

the same two time periods.7

 The results of this analysis 

showed a slightly positive relationship between changes in the level of imports and price-marginal cost ratios 

in concentrated industries. The authors postulated that 

some of the unexpected results may have been from 

the level of aggregation of the data.

Approach

Monthly PPI industry and commodity8 data are available at a detailed product level as well as at various 

aggregation levels. The Bureau of Economic Analysis 

(BEA) and the Census Bureau publish import and export data monthly by using the Standard International 

Trade Classification9

 structure, and the International 

Trade Commission publishes data by using the Harmonized Tariff Schedule10 coding structure. Providing a detailed analysis of the timing and level of price 

changes in PPIs compared with changes in imports and 

exports would be difficult using these sources because 

neither of the import and export data coding structures 

matches the PPI coding structures. In addition, the factors that affect prices often vary at the detailed product 

level, suggesting the need for an in-depth knowledge 

of product-specific economic factors. Because of these 

complications, analysis at this detailed level would need 

to be limited to the details of a few industries and would 

not support conclusions about the PPI in general.

The basic building block for the PPI sample is the 

NAICS six-digit industry level. In January 2011, the 

PPI calculated industry-level price indexes for 676 

industries in the agriculture, construction, mining, 

manufacturing, and services sectors of the economy. 

The Census Bureau publishes a wide range of statistics 

at the NAICS industry level every 5 years in its Economic Census as well as a more limited number of statistics 

annually. BEA publishes industry make and use data, including import and export values at the six-digit NAICS industry 

level in its Benchmark Input-Output (I-O) Accounts, which 

are compiled every 5 years.

BEA also publishes import and export data at the two- or 

three-digit NAICS level in its annual I-O tables. In addition, 

BEA publishes both quarterly and monthly import and export 

data by end-use category and commodity at an aggregation 

level that is above the NAICS industry level. Therefore, choosing between using industry level data that are available only 

every 5 years and using the higher level aggregate data that 

are available more frequently was necessary.

Analysis of data from a six-digit industry approach would 

allow a clearer perspective, since each six-digit industry within 

a NAICS three-digit category would likely face a unique set of 

economic factors. One of the conclusions in Thompson’s study 

was that the use of aggregate data may have affected the study 

results.11 Consequently, one may learn more by examining 

variations across six-digit industries in just two time periods 

than by looking at variations across three-digit NAICS annually.

As a result, the analysis in this article is based on BEA data 

from the 1997 and 2002 Benchmark I-O tables and from the 

1997 and 2002 Economic Census, along with PPI annual 

average indexes for 1997 and 2002. (Note: The 2007 Benchmark I-O Accounts tables were not available when I conducted this research, so more recent data could not be used.) In 

some cases, multiple six-digit NAICS were combined in the 

I-O tables in either 1997 and/or 2002. In those cases, data 

from the other sources were combined so that accurate comparisons could be made. After those adjustments, data were 

available for 257 manufacturing industries. The complete list 

of industries can be found in appendix B.

Since the trend toward globalization affects the manufacturing sector most strongly, I limited the analysis to this 

sector in order to manage the amount of data required. This 

choice was in line with the other studies that also focused 

solely on manufacturing.

I approached this study’s analysis by constructing the following three measures that alone or combined might indicate 

the level of industry globalization and then comparing the 

values of those statistics with price changes calculated using 

the corresponding industry PPIs:

• Import penetration = imports/(domestic production + 

imports – exports).

• Export intensity = exports/domestic production.

• Net import penetration = (imports – exports)/(domestic 

production + imports).
Producer Price Index

16  Monthly Labor Review • September 2012

Overall levels of imports to the United States and exports from the United States during each of the selected 

years as well as changes in those measures over the period were considered possible measures. However, since 

a change in the value of import and export levels reflects 

changes in price as well as quantity, comparisons between 

changes in these data elements and price index changes 

might be misleading. In addition, all three studies cited 

earlier used import penetration rather than the absolute 

level of imports. In addition to examining import penetration, Thompson included exports as part of her analysis by calculating export intensity.12 As a result, I adopted 

analysis of export intensity for this article, as well.

Given the assumption that higher imports of a product 

led to increased supply, price change seemed more likely 

to correlate negatively with import penetration levels 

or changes in those levels. On the other hand, high or 

increasing export levels seemed probable to indicate increased demand and a positive correlation seemed more 

likely between the export measures and price change. 

Since most industries have both imports and exports, I 

calculated the additional industry statistic net of import 

penetration for use in this article.

Since the value of the net import penetration measure 

would be positive when imports were greater than exports 

and negative when exports were larger, the expectation 

was that the level and changes in this measure would be 

negatively correlated with price change.

The 1997 and 2002 values were calculated for these statistics. For industries with an extremely low level of imports and/or exports in 1997, a small change in the level 

of imports or exports in 2002 could result in a very large 

percent change, possibly skewing analysis. As a result, I 

measured change by calculating the difference between 

the 1997 and 2002 levels rather than calculating the percent change for these statistics.

The cost of materials may be indirectly affected by globalization because increased use of imported materials 

may decrease costs. Furthermore, change in this measure 

was expected to be an important contributor to industry 

price change, with a positive relationship expected. As a 

result, I used data from the Economic Census to calculate 

the change in cost of materials between 1997 and 2002 

for each industry.

Many different factors not directly related to the trend 

toward globalization may also affect each industry’s price 

change. Identifying and quantifying all of these potential 

factors are beyond the scope of this article.

Table 1 summarizes the data values for some of those 

statistics across the 257 manufacturing industries studied. 

Appendix B lists the 1997 and 2002 import penetration 

and export intensity values by industry.

All manufacturing industries data summary, 1997–2002

Statistic Average

(percent)1

Standard 

deviation

High

(percent)1

Low

(percent)1

Number of 

negative 

values

Number 

of positive 

values < 5

Number 

of positive 

values 5

1997–2002 price change 1.41 10.80 85.97 –56.20 72 80 105

1997 import penetration 19.80 16.33 82.64 .00 — 65 192

2002 import penetration 23.17 19.25 96.63 .00 — 58 199

1997–2002 import penetration

difference2 3.37 7.52 39.10 –37.45 56 111 90

1997 export intensity 14.26 13.70 66.06 .00 — 67 190

2002 export intensity 12.98 13.98 97.66 .00 — 75 182

1997–2002 export intensity

difference2 –1.28 8.05 38.18 –56.82 132 118 27

1997 net import penetration 5.70 15.27 77.00 –59.85 104 63 90

2002 net import penetration 10.49 16.97 87.10 –36.48 87 51 119

1997–2002 net import penetration

difference2 4.79 8.15 46.00 –18.81 60 99 98

1997–2002 cost of materials

percent change .20 23.98 99.65 –72.91 136 22 99

1 Values are in percentages, except for differences, which are levels. 2 For industries with an extremely low level of imports and/or exports

in 1997, a small change in the level of imports or exports in 2002 could

result in a very large percent change for export intensity and import

penetration,possibly skewinganalysis.As a result, changewasmeasuredby

calculating differences rather than percent change for these statistics.

NOTE: Dash indicates data not applicable.

SOURCES: Bureau of Economic Analysis, Census Bureau, and U.S.

Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Table 1.

≥
Monthly Labor Review • September 2012  17

Analysis

Presumably, a number of unique factors in addition to 

globalization would affect the level of price change for 

most individual industries. As mentioned earlier, given 

the number of industries and potential independent variables, attempting to build a full regression model for price 

change that applied to all industries did not seem realistic. 

As a result, the goal of this analysis was only to determine whether a relationship existed between any of the 

globalization measures and changes in industry PPIs. The 

first step of analysis was to run single-variable regressions, 

with the PPI price change as the dependent variable and 

with each of 10 independent variables found in the statistic column of table 2. The results of the regressions are 

displayed in table 2.

The results indicated that domestic price change in an 

industry was negatively correlated with both the 1997 and 

2002 import penetration levels in that industry, perhaps 

indicating that to remain competitive, domestic producers responded to the introduction of imports by lowering 

their own prices. The 1997 and 2002 levels of net import 

penetration also were negatively correlated with price 

change. The net import penetration regressions, however, 

had smaller coefficients, slightly higher standard errors, 

and lower explanatory power than the import penetration 

equations. This result perhaps indicates that increases in 

exports in an industry do not directly offset the negative 

influence of imports on price change. As expected, a positive relationship was also found between the change in 

cost of materials and change in price, although the coefficient is very small. In addition, no significant relationship was found between price change and the differences 

in the levels of import penetration, export intensity, and 

net import penetration over time, i.e., between 1997 and 

2002.

The regression results also showed that domestic price 

change was negatively correlated with export level. This 

relationship was contrary to the results for import penetration and net import penetration and seemed counterintuitive, since the expectation was that the higher demand coming from exports would cause higher prices. 

The results were particularly surprising, since export 

transactions are directly priced in the PPI. An examination of the detailed data, however, sheds some light on this 

phenomenon, showing that industries tend to have similar 

levels of both imports and exports. For example in 1997, 

only 6 of the 66 industries in which exports accounted for 

less than 5 percent of domestic production had an import 

penetration level of more than 10 percent and only 9 of 

the 62 industries in which exports accounted for more 

than 20 percent of domestic production had an import 

penetration level of less than 20 percent. Although the 

United States may have both imports and exports of the 

same product, a number of different products are included 

in every industry, so the mix of imported products in an 

industry would likely be different from the mix of exported products. In addition, individual industries that include 

products from more than one processing stage may use 

global production processes. Firms in an industry may be 

exporting less processed intermediate materials and then 

importing the more processed intermediate product.

Using multiple independent variables with price 

change as the dependent variable, I ran additional regresRelationship between industry price change and globalization statistics, 1997–2002

Statistic Coefficient Standard error R-square

1997 import penetration 1–0.139 0.041 0.044

2002 import penetration 1–.122 .034 .044

1997–2002 import penetration difference –.145 .089 .006

1997 export intensity 2–.092 .049 .014

2002 export intensity 1–127 .048 .027

1997–2002 export intensity difference –.118 .084 .004

1997 net import penetration 3–.103 .044 .021

2002 net import penetration 3–.091 .039 .020

1997–2002 net import penetration difference –.034 .083 <.001

1997–2002 cost of materials percent change 1.001 <.001 .064

1 Significant at .01 level. 2 Significant at .10 level. 3 Significant at .05 level.

NOTES:  All models were tested for heteroscedasticity, and no problems

were found. 

SOURCE:  U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Table 2.
Producer Price Index

18  Monthly Labor Review • September 2012

sions. The results are displayed in table 3. In models 1 and 

2, both import penetration and export intensity were the 

independent variables. Model 1 used 1997 data and model 2 used 2002 data. With the use of the two independent 

variables, the relationship between price change and import levels remained significant in both regressions with 

a coefficient of –0.144 for 1997 import levels and a coefficient of –0.108 for 2002 import levels. The relationship 

between price change and export levels was not significant 

in either year, but in 1997, the coefficient was quite small 

but positive. For models 3 and 4, cost of materials change 

was added as an independent variable. Import penetration 

levels remained significant but with a somewhat smaller 

negative coefficient, and the cost of materials change was 

also significant. For models 5 and 6, import penetration 

difference and export intensity difference were also added, 

but neither was significant. In addition, the added variable 

did not result in any major change in the significance of 

the other independent variables. I also ran a model using 

only import penetration difference and export intensity 

difference as the independent variables, but neither one 

had a significant relationship with price. Consequently, 

the results were not included in the table. Models 7 and 

8 include net import penetration difference and cost of 

materials percent change, along with 1997 and 2002 net 

import penetration levels, respectively. Change in price 

was negatively correlated with net import penetration 

levels and positively correlated with cost of materials 

change, as was the case with the single variable regression 

models. Again, the explanatory power of import penetration seemed to exceed that of net import penetration. The 

relationship between price change and the net import 

penetration difference was not significant.

Thus far, analysis has clearly shown an overall negative 

relationship between price and import penetration at the 

industry level, as expected. On the other hand, expectations 

that a positive relationship would exist between industry 

export intensity and price change were not supported. 

The unexpected outcome with respect to exports may be 

a result of the existence of nonglobal industry-specific 

economic factors, which were considered out of scope for 

this study because of the difficulty of obtaining the data. 

As mentioned earlier, the unpredicted results may also be 

related to the fact that industries with the highest exports 

also often have high imports, so the impact of imports 

on industry prices may have overshadowed the impact 

of exports. To investigate this possibility, I created two 

sets of industries, one with exports and negative or zero 

net import penetration and the other with exports and 

positive net import penetration, and then performed an 

Results of multiple independent variable regressions with industry price change, 1997–2002

Independent variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1997 import penetration 1–0.144 — 2–0.109 — 2–0.104 — — —

(.050) (.050) (.051)

2002 import penetration — 2–.108 — 3–.083 — 2–.104 — —

(.045) (.045) (.051)

1997–2002 import penetration difference — — — — –.002 .102 — —

(.109) (.124)

1997 export intensity .011 — .006 — <–.001 —

(.060) (.059) (.063)

2002 export intensity — –.031 — –.012 — –.007 —

(.062) (.061) (.063)

1997–2002 export intensity difference — — — — –.054 –.047 — —

(.107) (.103)

1997 net import penetration — — — — — — 3–.075 —

(.043)

2002 net import penetration — — — — — — — 3–.075

(.043)

1997–2002 net import penetration — — — — — — –.041 –.167

difference (.080) (.387)

1997–2002 cost of materials percent — — 1.001 1.001 1.001 1.001 1.001 1.001

change (<.001) (<.001) (<.001) (<.001) (<.001) (<.001)

R-square .044 .048 .092 .091 .094 .094 .079 .080

F 5.88 6.45 8.56 8.45 5.18 5.18 7.27 4.39

p > F .003 .002 <.001 <.001 <.001 <.001 <.001 .001

1 Significant at .01 level. 2 Significant at .05 level. 3 Significant at .10 level.

NOTES:  All models were tested for heteroscedasticity, and no problems

were found. Dash indicates data not applicable.

SOURCE:  U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Table 3.
Monthly Labor Review • September 2012  19

analysis on each industry subset. Ideally, the strong export 

set of industries would include only those with exports 

and no imports, but this category did not include enough 

industries, with none in 1997 and only eight in 2002. As 

a result, the definition for the strong export subset of industries was expanded to include all industries with zero 

or negative net import penetration in 1997. For each 

of the industry subsets, I ran single variable regressions 

along with multiple independent variable regressions that 

included both import penetration and export intensity. 

Tables 4 and 5 display the results of these regressions.

The results of the single variable regressions did not 

support the theory that a positive relationship would exist 

between export intensity and domestic price change. The 

coefficients for the set of industries with zero or negative 

net import penetration showed that domestic price change 

had a significant negative relationship with 2002 import 

penetration and with import penetration difference. The 

coefficients for all the other globalization measures were 

also negative but not significant. Price change for the set 

of industries with positive net import penetration change 

had a significant negative relationship with 1997 and 

2002 import penetration, export intensity, and net import 

penetration levels, with coefficient size that was similar to 

that of the full set of industries and R-squares that were 

generally larger.

The results of the multiple independent variable regressions that included both import penetration and export 

Relationship between industry price change and globalization statistics for industry subsets, 1997–2002

Statistic

Net import penetration 0 Net import penetration > 0

Coefficient Standard 

error R-square Coefficient Standard error R-square

1997 import penetration –0.165 0.103 0.023 1–0.143 0.044 0.071

2002 import penetration 2–.188 .083 .044 1–.109 .037 .057

1997–2002 import penetration difference 3–.329 .172 .032 –.029 .098 .001

1997 export intensity –.038 .070 .003 1–.225 .072 .064

2002 export intensity –.096 .076 .014 1–.170 .059 .055

1997–2002 export intensity difference –.139 .126 .011 –.068 .115 .003

1997 net import penetration –.107 .115 .008 3–.134 .057 .038

2002 net import penetration –.196 .130 .020 3–.083 .045 .024

1997–2002 net import penetration difference –.055 .127 .002 –.003 .110 .000

1 Significant at .01 level. 2 Significant at .05 level. 3 Significant at .10 level.

NOTES:  All models were tested for heteroscedasticity, and no problems

were found.

SOURCE:  U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Table 4.

≤

Results of multiple independent variable regressions with industry price change, 1997–2002 

Independent variable Net import penetration 0 Net import penetration > 0

1997 import penetration 1–0.428 — –0.094 —

(.195) (.065)

2002 import penetration — 1–0.391 — –0.066

(.167) (.052)

1997 export intensity .210 — –.109 —

(.132) (.108)

2002 export intensity — .212 — –.097

(.152) (.083)

R-square .044 .060 .078 .066

F 2.57 3.56 5.93 4.93

p > F .081 .032 .003 .009

1 Significant at .05 level.

NOTES:  All models were tested for heteroscedasticity, and no problems

were found. Dash indicates data not applicable.

SOURCE:  U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Table 5.

≤
Producer Price Index

20  Monthly Labor Review • September 2012

intensity were not conclusive. For the set of industries 

with zero or negative net import penetration, the coefficients for both 1997 and 2002 export intensity were 

positive and relatively large but they were not significant. 

Although the export results were not significant, they may 

support the idea that a positive relationship could exist 

between export intensity and domestic prices that is offset 

by the negative relationship between prices and import 

penetration. The coefficients for import penetration were 

negative and much larger than the coefficients for the 

corresponding regressions for the entire set of industries, 

and they were significant. For the set of industries with 

positive net import penetration, all the coefficients were 

negative but insignificant.

A SIGNIFICANT NEGATIVE RELATIONSHIP exists 

between industry price change over the period 1997 to 

2002 and the levels of import penetration and net import 

penetration in both the starting and ending years. No consistent evidence of a corresponding relationship was found 

between export intensity and domestic price change.

Further research opportunities

When 2007 BEA I-O data become available, additional 

analysis could be applied to the relationships between 

price change and globalization statistics over a longer 

time length. Additional research could also be done to 

understand better the relationship between price change 

and globalization statistics in industries with significant 

amounts of both imports and exports. This additional 

research may require the use of detailed product-level 

import and export data that are available from the International Trade Commission. Since these data are available 

more frequently, they could also be used to create monthly 

or quarterly time series analyses.

Notes

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: I would like to thank Jon Weinhagen and 

John Greenlees for their advice and support.

1 Interactive Access to Industry Economic Accounts Data, Inputoutput accounts, Use Table, The Use of Commodities by Industries 

after Redefinitions (1998–2002, 2010), Sector level; Historical Benchmark I-O, Use Table, The Use of Commodities by Industries after Redefinitions (1987,1997), Sector level (Bureau of Economic Analysis), 

http://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?ReqID=5&step=1.

2 Interactive Access to Industry Economic Accounts, Domestic 

Product and Income, Table 1.1.5 Gross Domestic Product, Annual 

1997–2002 (Bureau of Economic Analysis), http://www.bea.gov/

iTable/iTable.cfm?ReqID=9&step=1.

3 For more information on the process the PPI uses to select producers and items, visit http://stats.bls.gov/opub/hom/homch14.

htm#data_sources_and_collection_methods.

4 The U.S. Census Bureau administers the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). For more information about NAICS,

visit http://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/index.html.

5 Raphael Auer and Andreas M. Fischer, “The Effect of Low Wage 

Import Competition on U.S. Inflationary Pressure,” Journal of Monetary Economics, May 2010, pp. 491–503.

6 Natalie Chen, Jean Imbs, and Andrew Scott, “Competition, Globalization and the Decline of Inflation,” CEPR Discussion Paper no. 

4695 (paper presented at Centre for Economic Policy Research, London, October 2004), http://www.cepr.org/pubs/dps/DP4695.asp.

7 Aileen J. Thompson, “Import Competition and Market Power: 

Canadian Evidence,” North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 

May 2002, pp. 40–55.

8 PPI industry data are found in table 5, and commodity data are 

found in table 6 of the PPI Detailed Report at the BLS website, http://

stats.bls.gov/ppi/ppi_dr.htm.

9 The United Nations Statistics Division administers the Standard 

International Trade Classification (SITC) structure. For more information about the SITC, visit http://unstats.un.org/unsd/class/family/

family2.asp?Cl=14.

10 The U.S. International Trade Commission administers the Harmonized Tariff Schedule coding structure. For more information on 

the Harmonized Trade Schedule, visit http://hts.usitc.gov/.

11 Thompson, “Import Competition and Market Power,” p. 20.

12 Thompson, “Import Competition and Market Power,” p. 11.

Measures of globalization magnitude and growth, 1997–2002

Measure 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Manufacturing imports as percentage of domestic supply of

manufactured good 15.0 15.7 17.0 19.3 19.5 20.0

Exports as percentage of total manufacturing output 13.6 13.3 13.0 13.8 13.6 13.0

Imports as percentage of gross domestic product 12.7 12.7 13.4 14.8 13.6 13.4

Exports as percentage of gross domestic product 11.5 10.8 10.6 11.0 10.0 9.4

Imports and exports as percentage of gross domestic product 24.1 23.5 24.0 25.8 23.6 22.9

SOURCE:  Bureau of Economic Analysis.

Table A–1.

APPENDIX A: Globalization and growth
Monthly Labor Review • September 2012  21

Percentage of import penetration and export intensity by industry, 1997 and 2002

2002 NAICS

code Industry description 1997 import penetration

1997 export 

intensity

2002 import 

penetration

2002 export 

intensity

311111 Dog and cat food manufacturing 1.8 6.7 1.6 5.3

311119 Other animal food manufacturing 1.0 3.0 1.4 5.9

31121 Flour milling and malt manufacturing 3.8 11.4 4.7 11.0

311225 Fats and oils refining and blending 1.5 5.2 1.1 2.8

31122AC Soybean and other oilseed processing 13.1 20.6 12.4 20.8

311230 Breakfast cereal manufacturing 1.8 1.9 2.8 4.7

31131 Sugar manufacturing 13.7 2.5 9.1 2.6

311320 Chocolate and confectionery manufacturing from cacao

beans 43.2 22.9 37.2 10.0

311330 Confectionery manufacturing from purchased chocolate .0 .0 1.9 3.0

311340 Nonchocolate confectionery manufacturing 10.8 4.7 16.3 4.4

31141 Frozen food manufacturing 5.1 4.6 5.2 3.3

31142 Fruit and vegetable canning, pickling, and drying 8.1 5.6 8.5 6.3

311513 Cheese manufacturing 3.3 1.1 4.0 1.2

311514 Dry, condensed, and evaporated dairy product

manufacturing 5.8 9.7 5.0 9.0

31151AC Fluid milk and butter manufacturing .2 .5 .7 .5

311520 Ice cream and frozen dessert manufacturing .1 2.0 .2 1.4

311615 Poultry processing .1 4.7 .3 4.2

31161AC Animal (except poultry) slaughtering, rendering, and

processing 4.2 7.9 5.7 8.0

31171 Seafood product preparation and packaging 13.4 3.4 16.9 3.8

31181 Bread and bakery product manufacturing 2.4 1.4 3.5 1.6

31182 Cookie, cracker, and pasta manufacturing 2.2 1.1 2.2 1.2

311830 Tortilla manufacturing .0 .0 .0 .2

31191 Snack food manufacturing 4.4 8.2 4.1 6.5

311920 Coffee and tea manufacturing 6.5 2.9 10.5 4.7

311930 Flavoring syrup and concentrate manufacturing 36.2 5.1 39.4 3.6

31194 Seasoning and dressing manufacturing 6.6 3.5 8.2 4.0

31199 All other food manufacturing 5.5 11.7 8.0 10.7

312110C Soft drink and ice manufacturing 1.8 .9

312120 Breweries 7.0 2.0 11.3 1.5

312130 Wineries 23.5 4.7 27.1 4.3

312140 Distilleries 23.3 5.5 27.5 4.1

3122A0C Tobacco product manufacturing 3.5 14.2 2.8 5.6

3131 Fiber, yarn, and thread mills 5.8 4.7 10.4 8.3

313210 Broadwoven fabric mills 21.5 11.2 47.4 40.8

31322 Narrow fabric mills and schiffli machine embroidery 21.8 25.7 33.2 40.0

313230 Nonwoven fabric mills 9.9 15.9 8.1 12.7

31324 Knit fabric mills 9.9 5.6 28.4 16.8

31331 Textile and fabric finishing mills .1 .2 .1 .2

313320 Fabric coating mills 16.5 25.0 22.4 23.5

314110 Carpet and rug mills 8.6 6.7 11.1 4.6

Table B–1.

APPENDIX B: Industry import penetration and export intensity
Producer Price Index

22  Monthly Labor Review • September 2012

Continued—Percentage of import penetration and export intensity by industry, 1997 and 2002

2002 NAICS

code Industry description 1997 import penetration

1997 export 

intensity

2002 import 

penetration

2002 export 

intensity

31412 Curtain and linen mills 19.9 5.2 36.5 5.3

31491 Textile bag and canvas mills 13.3 3.1 18.3 3.2

31499 All other textile product mills 33.6 19.8 27.8 13.9

3151 Apparel knitting mills 13.6 8.0 27.5 6.8

3152 Cut and sew apparel manufacturing 50.7 10.6 67.6 10.8

3159 Apparel accessories and other apparel manufacturing 43.9 25.7 61.5 23.0

316110 Leather and hide tanning and finishing 26.7 21.8 65.8 50.8

3162 Footwear manufacturing 82.6 15.5 91.3 20.6

3169 Other leather and allied product manufacturing 70.4 20.2 80.1 25.5

3211 Sawmills and wood preservation 21.0 8.1 21.6 6.3

321219 Reconstituted wood product manufacturing 19.7 6.0 28.1 4.5

32121AC Veneer and plywood manufacturing 14.2 8.4 20.5 7.2

32121BC Engineered wood member and truss manufacturing 8.2 5.3 

32191 Millwork 5.0 2.4 7.7 1.6

321920 Wood container and pallet manufacturing 5.7 1.5 8.2 2.3

321991 Manufactured home (mobile home) manufacturing .0 .2 .3 .4

321992 Prefabricated wood building manufacturing 1.5 3.2 4.2 1.1

321999 All other miscellaneous wood product manufacturing 29.8 6.8 31.8 4.4

322110 Pulp mills 44.5 47.1 45.5 46.0

3221A0C Paper and paperboard mills 14.2 9.8 15.1 6.6

32221 Paperboard container manufacturing 1.4 3.3 1.8 3.3

32222AC Coated and laminated paper, coated and laminated

packaging paper, and plastics film manufacturing 7.0 9.3 8.5 14.2

32222BC All other paper bag and coated and treated paper

manufacturing 16.7 11.4 23.9 10.1

32223 Stationery product manufacturing 4.6 6.3 6.0 7.4

322291 Sanitary paper product manufacturing 3.1 6.5 7.9 7.6

322299 All other converted paper product manufacturing 4.1 1.4 14.8 7.9

32311 Printing 1.8 2.0 2.3 2.2

32312 Support activities for printing .2 .9 .2 1.1

324110 Petroleum refineries 7.6 5.3 11.0 4.6

324121 Asphalt paving mixture and block manufacturing .9 .6 .6 .7

324122 Asphalt shingle and coating materials manufacturing 1.9 2.0 1.2 2.2

324191 Petroleum lubricating oil and grease manufacturing .1 .8 .2 .7

324199 All other petroleum and coal products manufacturing 1.8 32.1 2.8 27.8

325110 Petrochemical manufacturing 9.0 7.9 8.1 9.2

325120 Industrial gas manufacturing 2.0 3.5 2.1 2.7

325130C Synthetic dye and pigment manufacturing 27.4 21.8 25.2 25.1

32518 Other basic inorganic chemical manufacturing 15.1 17.4 24.1 23.2

32519 Other basic organic chemical manufacturing 20.3 23.6 22.1 24.6

325211 Plastics material and resin manufacturing 11.6 21.8 14.6 25.4

325212 Synthetic rubber manufacturing 13.5 21.4 20.4 28.0

Table B–1.
Monthly Labor Review • September 2012  23

Continued—Percentage of import penetration and export intensity by industry, 1997 and 2002 

2002 NAICS

code Industry description 1997 import penetration

1997 export 

intensity

2002 import 

penetration

2002 export 

intensity

32522 Artificial and synthetic fibers and filaments

manufacturing 11.3 13.1 13.8 12.6

32531 Fertilizer manufacturing 18.0 21.3 22.5 17.9

325320 Pesticide and other agricultural chemical manufacturing 8.5 13.5 12.1 12.0

3254 Pharmaceutical and medicine manufacturing 26.8 12.2 32.5 10.1

325510 Paint and coating manufacturing 2.9 6.7 3.3 6.8

325520 Adhesive manufacturing 2.7 5.1 4.9 9.5

32561 Soap and cleaning compound manufacturing 3.9 6.6 5.1 6.8

325620 Toilet preparation manufacturing 8.5 10.2 10.9 8.8

325910 Printing ink manufacturing 9.1 8.1 6.5 11.4

325920 Explosives manufacturing 11.8 12.4 11.2 13.8

32599 All other chemical product and preparation

manufacturing 12.4 13.1 11.2 13.8

326110C Plastics packaging materials and unlaminated film a

manufacturing 7.4 10.7 7.6 8.9

32612 Plastics pipe, pipe fitting, and unlaminated profile sha

manufacturing 7.3 10.1 5.8 5.5

326130 Laminated plastics plate, sheet (except packaging), and shape

manufacturing .0 .0 .0 .8

326160 Plastics bottle manufacturing 3.2 3.2 4.5 4.0

32619AC Other plastics product manufacturing 8.6 7.4 11.2 8.3

3261A0C Urethane and polystyrene foam product manufacturing .0 .0 .0 .1

32621 Tire manufacturing 20.3 10.3 29.1 14.2

326220 Rubber and plastics hoses and belting manufacturing 17.3 12.3 27.2 25.0

326290C Other rubber product manufacturing 13.6 7.4 10.8 7.5

32711AC Pottery, ceramics, and plumbing fixture manufacturing 43.9 10.2 53.1 18.6

32712 Clay building material and refractories manufacturing 21.7 13.3 42.5 17.3

327211 Flat glass manufacturing 16.3 13.1 18.6 20.7

327213 Glass container manufacturing 10.1 3.2 13.5 3.6

32721AC Glass products, except containers 16.3 13.1 20.0 13.8

327310 Cement manufacturing 12.3 .7 13.8 .7

327320 Ready-mix concrete manufacturing .0 .0 .0 .1

32733 Concrete pipe, brick, and block manufacturing .4 .4 .9 .4

327390 Other concrete product manufacturing 6.8 1.6 10.1 1.1

3274A0C Lime and gypsum product manufacturing 3.0 1.2 2.0 1.7

327910 Abrasive product manufacturing 17.1 9.6 32.3 17.6

327991 Cut stone and stone product manufacturing 38.5 2.7 43.2 1.8

327992 Ground or treated mineral and earth manufacturing 9.3 10.0 9.6 7.9

327993 Mineral wool manufacturing 5.5 9.1 7.3 7.7

327999 All other miscellaneous nonmetallic mineral product

manufacturing 8.8 7.9 15.0 12.4

33111 Iron and steel mills and ferroalloy manufacturing 19.1 6.0 20.6 6.4

Table B–1.
Producer Price Index

24  Monthly Labor Review • September 2012

Continued—Percentage of import penetration and export intensity by industry, 1997 and 2002

2002 NAICS

code Industry description 1997 import penetration

1997 export 

intensity

2002 import 

penetration

2002 export 

intensity

3312 Steel product manufacturing from purchased steel 23.7 6.7 21.1 5.8

33131AC Alumina refining and primary aluminum production 29.7 8.0 32.9 3.8

33131BC Aluminum product manufacturing from purchased

aluminum 9.2 12.8 12.7 11.7

331411 Primary smelting and refining of copper 25.9 12.6 44.9 6.2

331419 Other nonferrous metal primary smelting and refining 59.1 28.4 64.2 23.3

33142 Copper rolling, drawing, extruding, and alloying 14.6 9.8 15.9 11.8

33149 Nonferrous metal (except copper and aluminum)

rolling, drawing, extruding, and alloying 12.3 14.8 18.0 24.2

33151 Ferrous metal foundries 3.5 2.8 3.1 2.2

33152 Nonferrous metal foundries .2 .1 .0 .1

332114 Custom roll forming .0 .0 .0 .0

33211ABC Forging and stamping, except custom roll forming .5 3.1 1.1 1.5

33221AC Cutlery, utensil, pot, and pan manufacturing 30.6 9.3 31.4 10.3

33221BC Handtool manufacturing 21.5 11.5 28.2 13.8

332310C Plate work and fabricated structural product

manufacturing 2.3 3.7 4.7 2.2

33232 Ornamental and architectural metal products

manufacturing .9 1.1 2.1 1.3

332410 Power boiler and heat exchanger manufacturing 10.2 31.1 30.2 17.8

332420 Metal tank (heavy gauge) manufacturing 3.7 13.7 9.3 8.2

33243 Metal can, box, and other metal container (

gauge) manufacturing 2.7 2.5 2.9 3.0

332510 Hardware manufacturing 21.6 13.7 29.5 18.6

3326 Spring and wire product manufacturing 13.9 10.0 19.7 9.4

332710 Machine shops .0 .0 .0 .5

33272 Turned product and screw, nut, and bolt manufacturing 12.2 6.2 12.7 5.9

3328 Coating, engraving, heat treating, and allied activities .0 .0 .0 .1

33291 Metal valve manufacturing 19.7 14.4 26.9 17.4

332991 Ball and roller bearing manufacturing 24.3 13.4 22.6 15.9

332996 Fabricated pipe and pipe fitting manufacturing 2.5 2.7 .0 .0

33299AC Ammunition manufacturing 3.9 21.0 10.1 12.0

33299BC Arms, ordnance, and accessories manufacturing 12.2 17.6 19.7 12.8

33299CC Other fabricated metal manufacturing 24.6 17.0 33.4 20.8

333111 Farm machinery and equipment manufacturing 24.5 23.6 27.0 22.5

333112 Lawn and garden tractor and home lawn and garden

equipment manufacturing 4.3 9.1 .6 .5

333120 Construction machinery manufacturing 25.6 25.8 34.3 29.3

33313 Mining and oil and gas field machinery manufacturing 17.9 60.9 13.5 34.1

333220 Plastics and rubber industry machinery manufacturing 45.1 26.2 45.0 30.7

333295 Semiconductor machinery manufacturing 28.0 42.9 24.3 33.3

33329AC Other industrial machinery manufacturing 41.6 29.2 29.4 20.6

333314 Optical instrument and lens manufacturing 59.8 59.5 96.6 97.7

Table B–1.
Monthly Labor Review • September 2012  25

Continued—Percentage of import penetration and export intensity by industry, 1997 and 2002

2002 NAICS

code Industry description 1997 import penetration

1997 export 

intensity

2002 import 

penetration

2002 export 

intensity

333315 Photographic and photocopying equipment

manufacturing 53.1 22.4 69.7 41.4

333319 Other commercial and service industry machinery

manufacturing 4.5 6.2 5.3 4.4

33331AC Vending, commercial, industrial, and office machinery

manufacturing 37.6 29.0 36.5 20.0

333414 Heating equipment (except warm air furnaces)

manufacturing 4.5 8.8 12.1 5.3

333415 Air-conditioning and warm air heating equipment and

commercial and industrial refrigeration equipment

manufacturing 12.6 18.4 15.7 15.4

33341AC Air purification and ventilation equipment

manufacturing 23.0 25.9 20.9 11.1

333511 Industrial mold manufacturing 19.5 10.2 19.7 11.0

333514 Special die and tool, die set, jig, and fixture

manufacturing 8.7 5.1 8.6 4.8

333515 Cutting tool and machine tool accessory manufacturing 17.1 14.7 18.2 13.8

33351AC Metal cutting and forming machine tool manufacturing 51.8 31.2 61.0 49.4

33351BC Rolling mill and other metalworking machinery

manufacturing 6.4 4.4 2.5 3.2

333611 Turbine and turbine generator set units manufacturing 26.4 66.1 28.6 30.5

333618 Other engine equipment manufacturing 22.0 33.9 30.9 32.6

33361AC Mechanical power transmission equipment and ge

manufacturing 36.9 31.3 40.2 21.5

33391AC Pump and pumping equipment and measuring and

dispensing pump manufacturing 55.2 77.5 17.8 20.7

333912 Air and gas compressor manufacturing 27.8 33.3 28.3 30.9

33392 Material handling equipment manufacturing 18.5 14.3 17.4 11.4

333991 Power-driven handtool manufacturing 33.4 21.6 41.9 15.5

333993 Packaging machinery manufacturing 22.7 18.6 27.6 15.8

333994 Industrial process furnace and oven manufacturing 17.7 24.1 38.5 57.9

33399AC Other general purpose machinery manufacturing 43.1 53.1 54.0 59.9

33399BC Fluid power process machinery 15.0 11.1 17.4 11.3

334111 Electronic computer manufacturing 12.8 16.5 30.1 17.2

334112 Computer storage device manufacturing 65.7 34.4 65.2 24.7

33411AC Computer terminals and other computer

peripheral equipment manufacturing 61.1 31.1 70.9 32.2

334210 Telephone apparatus manufacturing 24.9 25.7 38.8 30.9

334220 Radio and television broadcasting and wireless 

communications equipment manufacturing 15.3 21.5 39.7 15.1

334290 Other communications equipment manufacturing 23.8 16.3 15.3 8.5

334310 Audio and video equipment manufacturing 79.8 45.6 84.1 38.4

334411 Electron tube manufacturing 34.2 48.3 28.6 51.8

334412 Bare printed circuit board manufacturing 46.9 41.1 25.3 25.8

334413 Semiconductor and related device manufacturing 35.6 34.5 34.0 44.6

33441AC Electronic capacitor, resistor, coil, transformer, and

other inductor manufacturing 46.9 41.1 52.9 38.2

334510 Electromedical and electrotherapeutic apparatus

manufacturing 23.7 30.4 31.7 26.3

Table B–1.
Producer Price Index

26  Monthly Labor Review • September 2012

Continued—Percentage of import penetration and export intensity by industry, 1997 and 2002

2002 NAICS

code Industry description 1997 importpenetration

1997 export

intensity

2002 import

penetration

2002 export

intensity

334511 Search, detection, navigation, guidance, aeronautical,

and nautical system and instrument manufacturing 3.4 7.1 4.8 8.7

334512 Automatic environmental control manufacturing for

residential, commercial, and appliance use 13.8 7.6 23.6 8.9

334513 Instruments and related products manufacturing for

measuring, displaying, and controlling industrial process

variables 31.8 39.1 52.5 58.2

334514 Totalizing fluid meter and counting device

manufacturing 19.9 9.4 18.3 6.1

334515 Instrument manufacturing for measuring and testing

electricity and electrical signals 22.0 38.6 33.7 49.9

334516 Analytical laboratory instrument manufacturing 26.4 41.9 33.5 39.1

334517 Irradiation apparatus manufacturing 30.4 31.0 37.1 32.9

33451AC Watch, clock, and other measuring and controlling

device manufacturing 47.6 34.2 48.8 29.4

334613 Magnetic and optical recording media manufacturing 35.3 41.6 58.2 30.8

33461AC Software, audio, and video media reproducing 6.8 9.0 6.6 4.6

335110 Electric lamp bulb and part manufacturing 30.7 21.7 41.6 18.8

335121 Residential electric lighting fixture manufacturing 23.7 6.7 36.4 6.8

335122 Commercial, industrial, and institutional electric lighting

fixture manufacturing 23.7 6.7 36.4 6.8

335129 Other lighting equipment manufacturing 23.7 6.7 36.4 6.8

33521 Small electrical appliance manufacturing 45.1 21.2 66.3 22.7

335221 Household cooking appliance manufacturing 33.8 9.3 40.1 7.3

335222 Household refrigerator and home freezer manufacturing 9.9 13.9 20.2 12.2

335224 Household laundry equipment manufacturing 9.6 15.9 11.9 13.4

335228 Other major household appliance manufacturing 28.8 10.2 17.6 9.4

335311 Power, distribution, and specialty transformer

manufacturing 18.1 11.7 31.1 9.3

335312 Motor and generator manufacturing 28.1 23.6 44.6 27.1

335313 Switchgear and switchboard apparatus manufacturing 13.0 7.8 26.1 15.0

335314 Relay and industrial control manufacturing 25.0 16.9 33.8 19.6

335911 Storage battery manufacturing 30.5 17.1 35.4 16.4

335912 Primary battery manufacturing 15.8 23.9 15.5 15.6

33592 Communication and energy wire and cable

manufacturing 19.0 18.9 24.5 17.4

33593 Wiring device manufacturing 19.8 17.7 18.7 17.8

335991 Carbon and graphite product manufacturing 21.1 21.5 24.3 23.5

335999 All other miscellaneous electrical equipment and

component manufacturing 36.9 35.0 42.0 38.8

33611 Automobile and light duty vehicle manufacturing 31.7 9.7 39.1 10.7

336120 Heavy duty truck manufacturing 18.8 17.5 19.1 12.8

336211 Motor vehicle body manufacturing 6.3 9.7 5.9 11.4

336212 Truck trailer manufacturing 3.8 7.9 8.7 9.3

336213 Motor home manufacturing 1.8 5.4 2.1 3.8

336214 Travel trailer and camper manufacturing 2.3 7.2 2.7 6.3

3363 Motor vehicle parts manufacturing 22.1 18.9 24.7 17.7

336411 Aircraft manufacturing 13.6 53.0 22.3 40.4

336412 Aircraft engine and engine parts manufacturing 36.8 40.1 46.0 55.6

Table B–1.
Monthly Labor Review • September 2012  27

Continued—Percentage of import penetration and export intensity by industry, 1997 and 2002

2002 NAICS

code Industry description 1997 importpenetration

1997 export

intensity

2002 import

penetration

2002 export

intensity

336413 Other aircraft parts and auxiliary equipment manufacturing 28.0 52.9 32.7 59.2

336510 Railroad rolling stock manufacturing 14.4 12.9 12.1 12.1

336611 Ship building and repairing .1 9.1 .4 7.4

336612 Boat building 14.7 13.4 13.4 10.3

336991 Motorcycle, bicycle, and parts manufacturing 50.2 27.6 55.2 20.3

336992 Military armored vehicle, tank, and tank component

manufacturing 9.7 65.7 16.2 35.3

336999 All other transportation equipment manufacturing 6.8 5.8 3.4 3.4

337110 Wood kitchen cabinet and countertop manufacturing 3.2 .3 4.1 .3

337121 Upholstered household furniture manufacturing 8.7 2.6 14.0 1.8

337122 Nonupholstered wood household furniture

manufacturing 31.7 10.2 44.4 5.6

337127 Institutional furniture manufacturing 26.1 7.0 35.2 9.6

33712AC Metal and other household furniture manufacturing 27.8 4.2 45.5 4.3

337212 Custom architectural woodwork and millwork

manufacturing .0 .0 6.9 1.5

337215 Showcase, partition, shelving, and locker manufacturing 4.4 3.1 24.2 5.3

33721AC Office furniture manufacturing 6.3 2.6 1.8 .8

337910 Mattress manufacturing .8 1.3 1.1 1.2

337920 Blind and shade manufacturing 14.9 1.8 20.3 1.0

339111 Laboratory apparatus and furniture manufacturing 2.3 10.3 3.6 6.0

339112 Surgical and medical instrument manufacturing 17.9 19.4 26.6 20.6

339113 Surgical appliance and supplies manufacturing 9.8 17.5 16.5 15.6

339114 Dental equipment and supplies manufacturing 13.1 16.9 18.4 18.5

339115 Ophthalmic goods manufacturing 39.3 17.8 38.4 17.9

339116 Dental laboratories .0 .0 .0 .2

33991 Jewelry and silverware manufacturing 49.9 7.9 66.8 23.8

339920 Sporting and athletic goods manufacturing 29.2 17.1 31.6 10.4

33993 Doll, toy, and game manufacturing 77.1 17.6 83.1 17.0

33994 Office supplies (except paper) manufacturing 25.1 13.5 31.2 10.7

339950 Sign manufacturing 1.0 1.1 1.7 1.7

339991 Gasket, packing, and sealing device manufacturing 20.5 14.5 25.3 16.2

339992 Musical instrument manufacturing 49.7 24.7 43.4 14.0

339994 Broom, brush, and mop manufacturing 23.2 6.3 30.4 6.6

33999AC All other miscellaneous manufacturing 34.7 17.9 33.5 11.4

SOURCES: Bureau of Economic Analysis, Census Bureau, and U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Table B–1.