INTERNATIONAL STUDIES OF FACTOR INPUTS AND TOTAL FACTOR PRODUCTIVITY: A BRIEF SURVEY

This paper summarizes the results of several studies on total factor productivity of twenty-five countries over the period 1950–1965. Some methodological issues which underlie the derivation and calculation of the familiar partial and total factor productivity indices are discussed. Though evidence on labor productivity for a large number of countries is presented and discussed, the main thrust of the discussion is in terms of the determinants of total factor productivity. The quantitative and qualitative contributions of labor and capital to growth of income are assessed with special attention to the contrasting patterns of these contributions among developed and developing economies. The problems of acceleration and retardation of the growth rate of some economies are considered and possible explanations are offered. Variations in the magnitude and sectoral distribution of the growth rates in several countries over this period are examined. Finally, areas for further research in comparative economic growth are suggested.     

International Productivity Differences and the Roles of Domestic Investment,FDI and Trade

This paper calculates Theil's entropy index to measure the extent of productivity differences across 92 countries for the period from 1970 to 2003. While there is evidence of increasing differences in productivity across these countries, we observe different patterns when we group the countries by income levels. These differences seem to be decreasing among middle income developing and developed countries, whereas they seem to be widening among low and high income developing countries. The results of our multivariate time series analysis also suggest that FDI increases productivity differences among low and high income developing countries, whereas GDI reduces these differences among low income countries in the long-run. Granger causality test results indicate that while an increase in GDI leads to a decline in growth of trade, a higher growth of trade appears to be important for attracting FDI to middle income countries. Furthermore, a reduction in productivity differences and a higher FDI growth lead to higher growth of trade in developed countries.     

Demographics and recent productivity performance: insights from cross‐country comparisons

Abstract.  Over the last few decades, countries have experienced quite different patterns of productivity growth. In this paper, we emphasize the role of country level demographics in explaining these differences. In particular, looking over the period 1960–2002, we show that cross‐country data support the notion that, starting in the late 1970s, countries went through a period of technological transition that lasted at least until the mid‐1990s for the fastest adjusting countries and is still proceeding for the slower adjusting countries. The main claim of the paper is that the country‐level rate of labour growth was a key factor driving the speed of adjustment to the new technological paradigm, implying that much of the cross‐country difference in economic performance over recent decades can be explained by demographic differences across countries as opposed to the many other factors emphasized in the literature. JEL classification: O33, O41     

Misallocation and aggregate productivity across time and space

Productivity is at the core of the large differences in income per capita across countries. What accounts for international productivity differences? I discuss cross‐country differences in the allocation of inputs across heterogeneous production units—misallocation—as a potential factor in accounting for aggregate productivity. Policies and institutions generating misallocation are prevalent in poor and developing countries and may also be responsible for differences in the selection of operating producers and technology used, contributing substantially to aggregate productivity differences across countries.     

How important are dual economy effects for aggregate productivity?

This paper brings together development accounting techniques and the dual economy model to address the role that factor markets have in creating variation in aggregate total factor productivity (TFP). Development accounting research has shown that much of the variation in income across countries can be attributed to differences in TFP. The dual economy model suggests that aggregate productivity is depressed by having too many factors allocated to low productivity work in agriculture. Data show large differences in marginal products of similar factors within many developing countries, offering prima facie evidence of this misallocation. Using a simple two-sector decomposition of the economy, this article estimates the role of these misallocations in accounting for the cross-country income distribution. A key contribution is the ability to bring sector-specific data on human and physical capital stocks to the analysis. Variation across countries in the degree of misallocation is shown to account for 30–40% of the variation in income per capita, and up to 80% of the variation in aggregate TFP.     

Decomposing productivity growth and divergence: an index number approach

We propose a cross-country productivity growth decomposition that allows us to quantify the industry-level contributors to an aggregate productivity growth differential. We deploy this cross-country decomposition to quantify—for the first time—the disaggregate contributors to the divergence in market sector productivity growth between Australia and New Zealand. The results suggest that large contributions to the divergence arise from differences in labour growth across the two countries and that cross-country structural differences are large, and generally act to reduce the divergence. Most of the industries are found to add to the divergence, with particularly large contributions coming from differences across the mining and wholesale trade industries. The views expressed in the paper are entirely my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of the Reserve Bank of New Zealand. I would like to thank Les Oxley and Kevin Fox for useful comments on earlier drafts. All errors and omissions are my own.     

Misallocation and productivity

A large portion of differences in output per capita across countries is explained by differences in total factor productivity (TFP). In this article, we summarize a recent literature — and the articles in this special issue on misallocation and productivity — that focus on the reallocation of factors across heterogeneous production units as an important source of measured TFP differences across countries.     

INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS OF INTER-INDUSTRY WAGE DIFFERENTIALS

We use OECD data to examine inter-industry wage differentials (relative wages among industries) for 14 OECD countries over the period 1970–85. We find, first, that the industrial wage structures have shown remarkable stability over time in terms of rank order for all the countries in the sample. Second, despite their rank order stability, wage structures show a tendency to expand or contract. While the U.S. has shown increasing industry wage dispersion between 1970 and 1985, the pattern is very mixed for other countries. Unionization is a significant factor in explaining cross-country differences. Third, industry wage rankings show some evidence of becoming increasingly similar across nations over time, and this movement is associated with a convergence of per capita incomes. Fourth, industry wage differentials are positively related to an industry's productivity growth, output growth, capital intensity, and export orientation.     

HAVE PRICE POLICIES DAMAGED LDC AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITY?

This paper examines price policies and agricultural productivity in 18 developing countries over the period 1961–1985. We measure productivity with both a nonparametric Malmquist index and a production function, confirming previous findings of declining agricultural productivity, but with sufficient inconsistencies as to raise concern about the adequacy of the methods. We nonetheless find considerable support for the hypothesis that unfavorable price policies have damaged agricultural productivity performance in these countries. (JEL 04, Ql)     

Tariff reduction and employment in Canadian manufacturing

Abstract.  This paper uses firm-level tax data to investigate whether the link between tariff changes and manufacturing employment differed across firms with various productivity and leverage characteristics over the period 1988–94. The results suggest that the effect of domestic tariff reductions on employment was typically small, but that losses were significantly larger for less productive firms. For instance, firms with average productivity in 1988 responded to domestic tariff changes by cutting employment by 11.3% over the period 1988–94, while lower-productivity firms typically shed 20.8% of their workforce over the same period. This paper also indicates that firms with unhealthy balance sheets – those with relatively too much equity or too much leverage – downsized more in the face of declining domestic tariffs, suggesting that financial constraints became more binding when tariff cuts were implemented. These results suggest that firms with high productivity and better financial health were better positioned to face the challenge of trade liberalization.     

POST-REFORM PRODUCTIVITY PERFORMANCE AND SOURCES OF GROWTH IN CHINESE INDUSTRY: 1980–85

This paper examines the productivity growth and its sources in 39 Chinese industries in the post-reform period 1980–85. We use both the gross-output and value-added models to isolate the contributions of labor, capital, materials and technical efficiency to growth in industrial output. Using new data from the National Industrial Census of China (1988) for large and medium-size enterprises, we find that Chinese industries, in particular, those in the manufacturing experienced sharp increases in total factor productivity growth in the 1984–85 period as compared to the 1980–84 period. Moreover, collective and private enterprises show higher output and total factor productivity gains than do state enterprises. Our regression results show that total factor productivity gains are closely tied to increases in retained profits and the proportion of total employees that are technical workers. However, labor bonuses have a negative effect on total factor productivity growth.     

Sectoral Energy- and Labour-Productivity Convergence

This paper empirically investigates the development of cross-country differences in energy- and labour productivity. The analysis is performed at a detailed sectoral level for 14 OECD countries, covering the period 1970–1997. A σ-convergence analysis reveals that the development over time of the cross-country variation in productivity performance differs across sectors as well as across different levels of aggregation. Both patterns of convergence as well as divergence are found. Cross-country variation of productivity levels is typically larger for energy than for labour. A β-convergence analysis provides support for the hypothesis that in most sectors lagging countries tend to catch up with technological leaders, in particular in terms of energy productivity. Moreover, the results show that convergence is conditional, meaning that productivity levels converge to country-specific steady states. Energy prices and wages are shown to positively affect energy- and labour-productivity growth, respectively. We also find evidence for the importance of economies of scale, whereas the investment share, openness and specialization play only a modest role in explaining cross-country variation in energy- and labour-productivity growth.      

Manufacturing consumption,relative prices,and productivity

I study the patterns of manufacturing consumption expenditures across a broad set of countries that differ in their level of development using disaggregated expenditure and price data. The relative price of manufacturing tends to decline with income and the real share rises with income, particularly for countries in the top half of the income distribution. I find that the nominal expenditure share of manufacturing displays a hump-shape pattern with respect to the level of income per capita. I document that the income elasticities of the relative price of individual manufacturing categories lie in a wide range. However, since most categories have a negative elasticity, the average elasticity for manufacturing is negative. In addition, most aggregations of individual categories, regardless of the criteria used, yield manufacturing sub-sectors that feature a negative income elasticity of its relative price and the variation across income in nominal expenditure shares tends to mask a larger variation across income in real shares. Using a standard development accounting framework, I report large differences in productivity across countries for manufacturing categories. I also find some differences in productivity across countries for manufacturing sub-sectors, but these differences are smaller than the differences between manufacturing and services and considerably smaller than the differences across individual manufacturing categories.     

The Productivity of US States since 1880

This study uses state-level variation in labor productivity levels at twenty-year intervals between 1880 and 1980 to examine the relative importance of institutional and geographical influences in explaining observed and persistent differences in standards of living over time and across regions. Focusing on fundamental rather than proximate influences, we find that both institutional characteristics and some physical geography characteristics account for a high proportion of the differences in state productivity levels: states with navigable waterways, a large minerals endowment, and no slaves in 1860, on average, had higher labor productivity levels throughout the sample period. However, we find little support for two other influences that have previously received attention—climate and latitude.     

Second thoughts on development accounting

The relative roles of factor inputs and productivity are estimated in explaining the level of economic development. For a large sample of countries, it is shown that international differences in factor inputs account for between two thirds and three quarters of international differences in output per worker if alternative identifying productivity assumptions and a quality-adjusted measure of human capital are employed. For a sample of OECD countries, it is found that all differences in output per worker can be attributed to differences in factor inputs, leaving no role for international productivity differences. This result supports the reasoning of a traditional neoclassical growth model.     

INFLATION TARGETING AND THE ECONOMY: LESSONS FROM CANADA'S FIRST DECADE

Inflation targeting has become the centerpiece of the monetary policy framework in a number of industrial countries and emerging economies. The first part of this article examines the Canadian experience with inflation targeting since its introduction in early 1991 and various issues that require resolution in establishing such a framework. It also examines the way inflation targets deal with demand, price, and productivity shocks. The second part focuses on Canada's economic performance during the 1990s. Factors other than monetary policy - most notably private sector restructuring and the fiscal situation in the first half of the decade - played an important role in the sluggishness of the recovery from the recession of 1990–91. Trend growth in Canada during the 1990s was lower than in earlier periods and than U.S. trend growth over the same period. The article examines the role of such factors as productivity growth and participation rates in explaining the differences. I conclude that a good monetary policy is necessary but not sufficient for good economic outcomes.     

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

We estimate productivity growth for 33 industries covering the entire Chinese economy using a time series of input–output tables covering 1982–2000. Capital input is measured using detailed investment data by asset and labor input uses demographic information from household surveys. We find a wide range of productivity performance at the industry level. We then show how these industry growth accounts may be consistently aggregated to deliver a decomposition of aggregate GDP growth. For the 1982–2000 period aggregate TFP growth was 2.5 percent per year; decelerating from a rapid rate in the early 1980s to negative growth during 1994–2000. The main source of growth during the 1982–2000 period was capital accumulation, with a small negative contribution from the reallocation of factors across industries.     

Allocative inefficiency and sectoral allocation of labor: Evidence from U.S. agriculture

Are productivity differences across producers in an industry a good indicator of allocative inefficiency? If so, what are the welfare consequences of reallocating labor from lesser to more productive producers? This paper addresses these questions in the context of factor specificity, which generates endogenous distribution of total factor productivity across producers, and reallocation of labor across sectors, as well as within a sector. The paper builds a multi-sector, multi-region general equilibrium model with land as a region-specific factor, and calibrates it using state-level U.S. data from 1960 to 2004, a period with considerable reallocation of labor out of agriculture. The results show that large and persistent differences in agricultural productivity across U.S. states are consistent with factor specificity due to geoclimatic conditions and do not correspond to economically significant allocative inefficiencies.     

Revisiting the European Monetary System Experience: Were Some Members More Equal than Others?

Difficulties in implementing effective liquidity support – to counter speculative attacks – may partly explain why regional exchange rate agreements crawl regional trade integration. Our novel analysis of the European Monetary System confirms that liquidity support was provided under the discretion of the anchor country (Germany), and was indeed asymmetric across member countries and/or periods. In particular, it was less forthcoming (i) to countries further away from Germany (less politically influential there), (ii) to larger countries (interfering more with the Bundesbank's monetary control) and (iii) during periods when German inflation accelerated (and the Bundesbank needed a firmer grip on liquidity).     

The influences of different R&D types on productivity growth in OECD countries

Productivity has become an important concern for the sustainable development and growth of a country. Countries, such as those in the Organization for Economic Cooperation Development (OECD), that actively innovate and conduct Research and Development (R&D) activities always have high productivity growth, with research to date examining the positive influences of R&D on productivity. R&D activities are classified into three types: basic research, applied research and experimental development. To test the different influences of the different R&D types, panel data from 23 OECD countries for the period 1996–2010 have been constructed and the Data Envelopment Analysis method is used to measure and decompose productivity growth. Moreover, based on Mansfield's [“Basic Research and Productivity Increase in Manufacturing.” The American Economic Review 70: 863–873] model, the influences of each R&D type on productivity growth are tested. The empirical tests show that R&D investments in experimental development and applied research have a positive effect on productivity growth in the immediate period; basic research influences productivity growth with a lengthier lag, even up to three periods.