IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/prs/ecoprv/ecop_0249-4744_2003_num_159_3_6909.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Le paradoxe de la productivité en France et aux États-Unis : une réévaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Yannick L’Horty
  • Fabrice Gilles

Abstract

[eng] The productivity paradox in France and in the United States : a re-evaluation.. In the United States, activity accelerated in the second part of the cycle from 1995 on, against a background of slower inflation. The evolution in France was qualitatively the same after 1997, indicating here too the impact of a positive supply-side shock. The diffusion of new information and communication technology (NICT) explains only part of these singularities. On the one hand, a calculation of contributions to growth suggests that it explains roughly half the increase in activity in the United States and one fifth in France. On the other, a trend-cycle decomposition reveals that the trend increase in growth in the United States is highly localised in the NICT producer sectors and that there was hardly any trend-break in productivity gains. In France, where sectoral differences are less distinct, the diffusion of NICT was accompanied by a slowdown in trend productivity gains. In both cases, this leaves little room for the effects of the diffusion of technical progress associated with NICT. [fre] Aux États-Unis, l’activité s’est accélérée dans la deuxième partie du cycle, après 1995, dans un contexte de ralentissement de l’inflation. En France, l’évolution a été qualitativement la même depuis 1997, évoquant là aussi les effets d’un choc d’offre positif. La diffusion des nouvelles technologies de l’information et des communications (NTIC) explique en partie seulement ces singularités. D’un côté, un calcul des contributions à la croissance suggère qu’elle expliquerait environ la moitié de l’augmentation de l’activité aux États-Unis et un cinquième en France. D’un autre côté, une décomposition tendance-cycle révèle que l’augmentation tendancielle de la croissance aux États-Unis est très localisée dans les secteurs producteurs des NTIC et il n’y a guère de rupture tendancielle des gains de productivité. En France, où les écarts sectoriels sont moins nets, la diffusion des NTIC s’est accompagnée d’un ralentissement des gains tendanciels de productivité. Dans les deux cas, il reste peu de place aux effets de diffusion du progrès technique associé aux NTIC.

Suggested Citation

  • Yannick L’Horty & Fabrice Gilles, 2003. "Le paradoxe de la productivité en France et aux États-Unis : une réévaluation," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 159(3), pages 1-15.
    • Handle: RePEc:prs:ecoprv:ecop_0249-4744_2003_num_159_3_6909
    DOI: 10.3406/ecop.2003.6909
    Note: DOI:10.3406/ecop.2003.6909
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.3406/ecop.2003.6909
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.persee.fr/doc/ecop_0249-4744_2003_num_159_3_6909
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3406/ecop.2003.6909?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karl Whelan, 2002. "Computers, Obsolescence, And Productivity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(3), pages 445-461, August.
    2. Harvey, A C & Jaeger, A, 1993. "Detrending, Stylized Facts and the Business Cycle," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(3), pages 231-247, July-Sept.
    3. Dale W. Jorgenson & Kevin J. Stiroh, 2000. "Raising the Speed Limit: U.S. Economic Growth in the Information Age," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 31(1), pages 125-236.
    4. Patrick Allard, 1994. "Un repérage des cycles du PIB en France depuis l'après-guerre," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 112(1), pages 19-34.
    5. Gilbert Cette & Jacques Mairesse & Yussuf Kocoglu, 2000. "La mesure de l'investissement en technologies de l'information et de la communication : quelques considérations méthodologiques," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 339(1), pages 73-91.
    6. François Lequiller, 1997. "L'indice des prix à la consommation surestime-t-il l'inflation ?," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 303(1), pages 3-32.
    7. Stephen D. Oliner & Daniel E. Sichel, 1994. "Computers and Output Growth Revisited: How Big Is the Puzzle?," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 25(2), pages 273-334.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Franck Essosinam KARABOU & Komlan Ametowoyo ADEVE, 2018. "ICT and Economic Growth in WAEMU: An Analysis of Labor Productivity," Economics and Applied Informatics, "Dunarea de Jos" University of Galati, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, issue 2, pages 12-20.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jonathan Temple, 2002. "The Assessment: The New Economy," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 18(3), pages 241-264.
    2. Alessandra Colecchia & Paul Schreyer, 2002. "ICT Investment and Economic Growth in the 1990s: Is the United States a Unique Case? A Comparative Study of Nine OECD Countries," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 5(2), pages 408-442, April.
    3. Hasan Bakhshi & Jens Larsen, 2001. "Investment-specific technological progress in the United Kingdom," BIS Papers chapters, in: Bank for International Settlements (ed.), Empirical studies of structural changes and inflation, volume 3, pages 49-80, Bank for International Settlements.
    4. Simon, John & Wright, Sharon, 2005. "L’utilisation des technologies de l’information et sa contribution à la croissance en Australie," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 81(1), pages 165-202, Mars-Juin.
    5. James Bessen, 2002. "Technology Adoption Costs and Productivity Growth: The Transition to Information Technology," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 5(2), pages 443-469, April.
    6. Jason G. Cummins & Giovanni L. Violante, 2002. "Investment-Specific Technical Change in the US (1947-2000): Measurement and Macroeconomic Consequences," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 5(2), pages 243-284, April.
    7. Cécile Denis & Kieran Mc Morrow & Werner Röger, 2002. "Production function approach to calculating potential growth and output gaps - estimates for the EU Member States and the US," European Economy - Economic Papers 2008 - 2015 176, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    8. Reikard, Gordon, 2005. "Endogenous technical advance and the stochastic trend in output: A neoclassical approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1476-1490, December.
    9. Fabrice Gilles & Yannick L'Horty, 2005. "Is there still a productivity paradox? two methods for a transatlantic comparison," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(7), pages 533-551.
    10. Dale W. Jorgenson & Mun S. Ho & Kevin J. Stiroh, 2008. "A Retrospective Look at the U.S. Productivity Growth Resurgence," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 3-24, Winter.
    11. Nathalie Greenan & Yannick L’Horty, 2002. "Le paradoxe de la productivité," Documents de recherche 02-02, Centre d'Études des Politiques Économiques (EPEE), Université d'Evry Val d'Essonne.
    12. Mirko Draca & Raffaella Sadun & John Van Reenen, 2006. "Productivity and ICT: A Review of the Evidence," CEP Discussion Papers dp0749, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    13. Kieran Mc Morrow & Werner Roeger, 2001. "Potential Output: Measurement Methods, "New" Economy Influences and Scenarios for 2001-2010 - A comparison of the EU-15 and the US," European Economy - Economic Papers 2008 - 2015 150, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    14. Raquel Ortega-Argilés, 2012. "The Transatlantic Productivity Gap: A Survey Of The Main Causes," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 395-419, July.
    15. Kiley, Michael T., 2001. "Computers and growth with frictions: aggregate and disaggregate evidence," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 171-215, December.
    16. Basu, Susanto & Fernald, John G. & Shapiro, Matthew D., 2001. "Productivity growth in the 1990s: technology, utilization, or adjustment?," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 117-165, December.
    17. J. Bradford DeLong, 2002. "Do We Have a "New" Macroeconomy?," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 2, pages 163-184, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Dale W. Jorgenson & Mun S. Ho & Kevin J. Stiroh, 2005. "Growth of US Industries and Investments in Information Technology and Higher Education," NBER Chapters, in: Measuring Capital in the New Economy, pages 403-478, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Ark, Bart van, 2002. "ICT investments and growth accounts for the European Union," GGDC Research Memorandum 200256, Groningen Growth and Development Centre, University of Groningen.
    20. Lach, Saul & Trajtenberg, Manuel & Shiff, Gil, 2008. "Together but Apart: ICT and Productivity Growth in Israel," CEPR Discussion Papers 6732, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C49 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Other
    • O47 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - Empirical Studies of Economic Growth; Aggregate Productivity; Cross-Country Output Convergence
    • P52 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Comparative Economic Systems - - - Comparative Studies of Particular Economies

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:prs:ecoprv:ecop_0249-4744_2003_num_159_3_6909. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Equipe PERSEE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.persee.fr/collection/ecop .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.