Can total factor productivity explain value added growth in services?

This paper examines the factors responsible for generating the services led growth witnessed in the Indian economy during 1980–2005. A sectoral growth accounting exercise shows that total factor productivity (TFP) growth was the fastest for services; moreover this TFP increase was significant in accounting for service sector value added growth. A growth model with agriculture, industry and services as three principal sectors is calibrated to Indian data using sectoral TFP growth rates. The baseline model performs well in accounting for the evolution of value added shares and their growth rates, but is unable to capture sectoral employment share trends. The performance of the model with respect to value added shares improves when the post 1991 increase in service sector TFP growth following the inception of market-based liberalization reforms is accounted for. A modified version of the model with public capital can better track trends in sectoral employment shares.     

Flexible Labour,Firm Performance and the Dutch Job Creation Miracle

Unlike internal (‘functional’) forms of flexibility of labour, external (‘numerical’) forms of flexibility (i.e. high shares of people on temporary contract or a high turnover of personnel) yield substantial savings on a firm’s wage bill. Savings on wage bills lead to higher job growth, but do not translate into higher sales growth. Externally flexible labour appears to be related to lower labour productivity growth, the effects being different for innovating vs non‐innovating firms. We discuss these findings from firm‐level and worker‐level data against the background of the Dutch job creation miracle during the 1980s and 1990s. Modest wage increases and flexibilization of labour markets may indeed create lots of jobs. However, this is likely to happen at the expense of labour productivity growth, raising serious doubts about the long‐run sustainability of a low‐productivity–high‐employment growth path.     

Engines of growth. Innovation and productivity in industry groups

The diversity of technological activities that contribute to growth in labour productivity is examined in this article for manufacturing and services industries in eight major EU countries. We test the relevance of two “engines of growth”, i.e., the strategies of technological competitiveness (based on innovation in products and markets) and cost competitiveness (relying on innovation in processes and machinery) and their impact on economic performance. We propose models for the determinants of changes in labour productivity and we carry out empirical tests for both the whole economy and for the four Revised Pavitt classes that group manufacturing and services industries with distinct patterns of innovation. Tests are carried out by pooling industries, countries and three time periods, using innovation survey data from CIS 2, 3 and 4, linked to economic variables. The results confirm the specificity of the two “engines of growth”; economic performances in European industries appear as the result of different innovation models, with strong specificities of the four Revised Pavitt classes.     

Mind the Gap! International Comparisons of Productivity in Services and Goods Production

Abstract. In this paper, we make a comparison of industry output, inputs and productivity growth and levels between seven advanced economies (Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, United Kingdom and United States). Our industry-level growth accounts make use of input data on labour quantity (hours) and composition (schooling levels), and distinguish between six different types of capital assets (including three information and communication technology (ICT) assets). The comparisons of levels rely on industry-specific purchasing power parities (PPPs) for output and inputs, within a consistent input–output framework for the year 1997. Our results show that differences in productivity growth and levels can be mainly traced to market services, not to goods-producing industries. Part of the strong productivity growth in market services in Anglo-Saxon countries, such as in Australia and Canada, may be related to relatively low productivity levels compared with the United States. In contrast, services productivity levels in continental European countries were on par with the United States in 1997, but growth in Europe was much weaker since then. In terms of factor input use, the United States is very different from all other countries, mostly because of the more intensive use of ICT capital in the United States.     

ICT and Productivity in Europe and the United States Where Do the Differences Come From?

In this paper we analyse labour productivity growth in 51 industriesin European countries and the United States. Using shift-sharetechniques we identify the industries in which the U.S. is leadingmost strongly. With a detailed decomposition analysis we identifywhether the sources of the U.S. advantage are due to fasterproductivity growth, higher industry productivity levels relativeto the country aggregate, different employment shares or fasterchange in employment shares of rapidly growing industries. Theresults show that U.S. productivity has grown faster than inthe EU because of a larger employment share in the ICT producingsector and faster productivity growth in services industriesthat make intensive use of ICT. Wholesale and retail trade andthe financial securities industry account for most of the differencein aggregate productivity growth between the EU and the U.S.(JEL N10, O47, O57)     

The influence of international trade on labour productivity in services: The case of Brazil in the 1990s

In the developing world, services account for a rising share of domestic employment and international trade. Thus, it is important to know whether trade liberalization contributes to labour productivity in services. We explore this question, examining the 1990–2000 Brazilian trade liberalization. We find that growth of imports and exports strengthened labour productivity in services, but the contribution was smaller in subsectors with more college graduates, and this negative offset was larger in subsectors that received large foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows. Improved access to imported manufactured intermediate inputs raised downstream services' labour productivity and downstream manufacturing firms benefitting from tariff cuts enacted by trade partners generated spillovers that improved the labour productivity of upstream service subsectors. However, FDI inflows and investments in human and physical capital modified these downstream factors. We conclude that the Brazilian trade liberalization strengthened productivity in services, but unequally across subsectors.     

Comparisons of real output and productivity of Chinese and Indian manufacturing, 1980–2002

The principal objective of this paper is to compare the real output and labour productivity of Chinese and Indian manufacturing from 1980 to 2002. Using an industry-of-origin approach, purchasing power parities (PPPs) for the benchmark year 1985 are derived from the Chinese and Indian industrial censuses. In turn, the PPPs are used to convert Indian manufacturing GDP into Chinese yuan for direct comparisons. Secondary objectives are twofold: first, to set this direct comparison within the general context of the economic policy reform process followed in each country, and second, to compare and contrast the organisation and structure of both countries' manufacturing sectors. The analysis shows that since 1980, real value added and labour productivity growth for Chinese manufacturing has been well above Indian levels.     

Costly investment, complementarities and the skill premium

We propose a new framework to analyse the relationship between the relative high-skilled labour endowment, the skill premium and economic growth. Building on Acemoglu and Zilibotti (2001), we introduce physical capital; internal costly investment in both capital and R&D; and complementarities between intermediate goods. We only find a positive relationship between the relative labour endowment and both the skill premium and economic growth within determined intervals of relative labour endowment values, which vary with the absolute productive advantage of high over low-skilled labour. The model thus accommodates theoretically mixed empirical results on the relative labour endowment-skill premium relationship. We further find that the impact on both the relative labour endowment and the skill premium of a rise in investment costs or in the complementarities degree depends on: (i) the absolute productivity advantage of high over low-skilled labour; and (ii) the relative labour endowment.     

The Impact Of Computer Prices On International Comparisons Of Labour Productivity

This paper analyses the international comparability of methods used to convert the value added of the office and computing machinery sector (OCM) into constant prices for nine OECD countries. It concludes that the variations which exist in the price indexes are largely due to differences in the methods countries use to capture changes in the quality of an industry's output over time. The paper evaluates the impact of these different OCM price indexes on the growth rate of labour productivity during the 1980s by conducting a sensitivity test where the US OCM index is substituted for each of the individual country indexes. This experiment causes the OCM labour productivity growth rate to change by over a factor of ten for several countries. This result suggests that international comparisons of labour productivity should not be made for the OCM sector using the official data, and that labour productivity comparisons of sectors OCM belongs to—non-electrical machinery and fabricated metal products and machinery—should be conducted cautiously, if at all.     

Technological convergence, R&D, trade and productivity growth

This paper analyses productivity growth in a panel of 14 United Kingdom manufacturing industries since 1970. Innovation and technology transfer provide two potential sources of productivity growth for a country behind the technological frontier. We examine the roles played by research and development (R&D), international trade, and human capital in stimulating each source of productivity growth. Technology transfer is statistically significant and quantitatively important. While R&D raises rates of innovation, international trade enhances the speed of technology transfer. Human capital primarily affects output through private rates of return (captured in our index of labour quality) rather than measured TFP.     

A Decomposition of Changes in Labour Productivity in Australia: 1970-71 to 1989-90*

We show that business-cycle phenomena, climatic conditions and industrial structure are important determinants of annual variations in Australia's labour productivity growth. Another finding is that Australia's productivity slowdown in the 1980s was associated with a reduction in capital growth per unit of labour. The methodology relies on production functions at the industry level We analyze the sensitivity of results to the specification of these functions.     

ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE AND PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE: AN APPLICATION TO GREEK MANUFACTURING

To comprehend the impact of public infrastructure on economic performance this paper provides a measure of productivity growth as derived from duality theory. This productivity growth is decomposed into the components of technical change, returns to scale and the effects of public infrastructure, the variable of our interest. In an application, we opt for Greek manufacturing so as to investigate whether the decline in its growth rate is partly explained by public infrastructure. Despite some variation in the estimation results of shadow shares across industries, public infrastructure asserts a cost saving effect in most industries, though it also appears that traditional labour‐intensive industries with lower level of technological advancement do not benefit from the provision of public infrastructure. The estimation results further demonstrate that while public infrastructure enhanced productivity growth over the sample period for most industries, low infrastructure investment in the 1970s and the 1980s undermined productivity growth.     

Lost Exceptionalism? Comparative Income and Productivity in Australia and the UK, 1861–1948*

Australia had one of the highest per capita incomes in the world in the late nineteenth century, although this exceptional position subsequently eroded over time. This paper compares national income and sectoral labour productivity in Australia and the UK between 1861 and 1948 to uncover the underlying sources of Australia's high income and the reasons for its subsequent relative decline. We find that the country's higher per capita income was due primarily to higher labour productivity, because labour force participation, although higher in Australia than in the USA, was lower than in the UK. Australia had a substantial labour productivity lead in agriculture throughout the period, due to the importance of high value-added, non-arable farming, and a smaller lead in industry before World War I. The early productivity lead in industry was largely based on the importance of mining, and disappeared as manufacturing became more important. There was little productivity difference in services. These results reaffirm the importance of Australia's successful exploitation of its natural resource endowments in explaining the country's high initial income.     

Information Technology and Productivity Growth in the 2000s

Abstract. US productivity growth experienced continued productivity growth after 2000 even as investment, particularly in information technology (IT), slowed. This paper uses industry-level data to examine the link between average labor productivity (ALP) growth and IT in the post-2000 period. We use difference-in-difference and cross-sectional regressions to show that the link between ALP growth and IT-intensity is weaker after 2000 than before. These results are robust to alternative measures of IT-intensity such as the IT share of capital services, the level of IT capital depth, and the share of IT capital services in total output. We conclude that the post-2000 productivity gains in the United States do not appear to have been driven directly by IT.     

Intangible Investment and Changing Sources of Growth in Korea

We examine how intangible investments change the sources of growth in the Korean economy. After constructing a novel industry‐level data set on intangibles, we estimate the contribution of intangible‐intensive industries and other industries to aggregate productivity growth in 1981–2008. The contribution of intangible‐intensive industries to aggregate labour productivity growth has significantly increased, whereas that of other industries has substantially decreased. The increased contribution of intangible‐intensive industries is mainly associated with total factor productivity growth rather than with input growth. This suggests that innovations related to intangible investments in these industries might become a new key source of productivity growth in Korea.     

A two-sector Kaleckian model of growth and distribution with endogenous productivity dynamics

This study extends a two-sector Kaleckian model of output growth and income distribution by incorporating endogenous labour productivity growth. The model is composed of investment goods and consumption goods production sectors. The impact of a change in wage and profit shares on capacity utilisation and output growth rates at the sectoral and aggregate levels are identified. The study reveals short-run cyclical capacity utilisation rates and productivity growth dynamics. Even if the short-run steady state is stable, the capital accumulation rate in the consumption goods sector must decrease more than that in the investment sector for long-run stability. When simultaneous rises in profit shares in both the sectors affect long-run aggregate economic growth differently at a steady state, the distributional interests between the same class in different sectors may hamper the long-run economic growth. A policy message is that the effect of income distribution on industrial output growth is not always beneficial. These phenomena are specific to two-sector models and cannot be observed when using conventional aggregate growth models.     

The Delta-Model Revisited: Recent trends in the structural performance of the Dutch economy

Since the late 1980s, the Dutch economy has outperformed neighbouring countries in terms of employment and GDP growth. We argue that the recent growth performance of the Netherlands has primarily been the result of a correction of the belowaverage performance during the 1970s. This correction was mainly brought about by a significant wage moderation since the early 1980s, probably strengthened by the creation of a more effective wage negotiation structure and measures to reduce the replacement rate. Furthermore, we show that the euphoria about the 'Delta model' is dampened by a slowdown in labour productivity performance, which appears to be particular serious in major parts of the services sector.     

The structural transformation and aggregate productivity in Portugal

We document the substantial process of structural transformation—the reallocation of labor between agriculture, manufacturing, and services—and aggregate productivity growth undergone by Portugal between 1956 and 1995. We assess the quantitative role of sectoral labor productivity in accounting for these processes. We calibrate a model of the structural transformation to data for the United States and use the model to gain insight into the factors driving the structural transformation and aggregate productivity growth in Portugal. The model implies that Portugal features low and roughly constant relative productivity in agriculture and services (around 22%) and a modest but growing relative productivity in manufacturing (from 44 to 110%). We find that productivity growth in manufacturing accounts for most of the reduction of the aggregate productivity gap with the United States and that a further closing of this gap can only be accomplished via improvements in the relative productivity of services. This paper was written while the authors were affiliated with the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond. We would like to thank the editor, two anonymous referees, and participants at the Third Conference on Portuguese Economic Development in the European Context organized by the Bank of Portugal for their comments. All errors are our own.     

Age dependency and labour productivity divergence

This study finds strong empirical evidence in favour of the hypothesis that the age composition of population matters for labour productivity growth. We applied the fixed effects panel model using data on a large number of countries over the period 1980–2010. Our results suggest that higher age dependency not only directly impacts negatively on labour productivity but also modifies the impact of other determinants of labour productivity. Child dependency has a more adverse effect on labour productivity than old age dependency. We specifically find that the marginal effects of gross capital formation, information and communication improvement, and labour market reforms are significant at lower levels of age dependency. However, the marginal effect of savings on labour productivity is high at a high level of age dependency. The impact of age dependency varies between developed and developing economies. Diversity in the size and nature of age dependency across regions and different income groups help to explain the labour productivity differential across them.     

The Dynamic Effects of the US Productivity Boom on Australia*

How has the USA's ‘new economy’ productivity boom affected Australia? We consider this question using a dynamic multisector growth model of the Australian and US economies. We find that productivity growth in the US durables sector generates small but important gains to Australia. We find that the transmission of growth is generated through increased export demand for agriculture. Consequently, the USA's productivity growth tends to favour Australia's traditional export sectors. Likewise, it increases the relative demand for less skilled labour in Australia and reduces the demand for more skilled labour and higher education.