GROWTH ACCOUNTING AND PRODUCTIVITY MEASUREMENT*

This paper compares the growth accounting approaches to aggregate productivity measurement and analysis of three major researchers: E. F. Denison, D. W. Jorgenson, and J. W. Kendrick. The investigetors are compared in terms of their treatment of a number of crucial elements, including measurement of output and of capital and labor inputs (including composition or quality changes), total factor productivity growth, economies of scale, and intensity of demand (for output). Judged by the standard of the neoclassical economic theory of production-the only generally accepted basis for input aggregation-Denison departs significantly from the production theory framework in his measurement of output and capital input, Kendrick to some degree in his measure of capital input, and Jorgenson not at all. The effects of these departures are illustrated with reference to the recent productivity slowdown. The probable near-term future utility of growth accounting methods for productivity analysis is assessed, and some related econometric modeling issues are noted.     

The Influence of Harm Characteristics on Endorsement of Actions That Cause Harm

This study investigated the influence ofcharacteristics embedded in ethical dilemmas on theendorsement of actions that caused both benefits andharms. The results revealed that the identity of thetarget to be harmed and the number to be harmedinfluenced endorsement of the proposed action in theethical scenarios. Specifically, study subjects wereless likely to endorse actions that cause harm tohumans than actions that cause harm to non-humans(non-human animals and plants). Subjects indicatedthat they were less likely to endorse actions thatcause harm to many than actions that cause harm tofew.