IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cje/issued/v37y2004i4p1118-1150.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Total factor productivity and the measurement of technological change

Author

Listed:
  • Richard Lipsey
  • Kenneth Carlaw

Abstract

TFP is interpreted in the literature in different, mutually contradictory ways. Changes in TFP are shown to measure not technological change, only the super-normal returns to investing in such change - returns that exceed the full opportunity cost of the activity. Thus, in the limit, technological change can proceed with unchanged TFP. Measuring the effects of technological change instead requires counterfactual estimates. Reasons why changes in TFP are imperfect measures of super normal returns are also studied - reasons connected with the timing of output responses, the treatment of R&D in the national accounts, the omission of resource inputs, and two types of aggregation.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard Lipsey & Kenneth Carlaw, 2004. "Total factor productivity and the measurement of technological change," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 37(4), pages 1118-1150, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:cje:issued:v:37:y:2004:i:4:p:1118-1150
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3696125
    Download Restriction: only available to JSTOR subscribers
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. N. F. R. Crafts & C. K. Harley, 1992. "Output growth and the British industrial revolution: a restatement of the Crafts-Harley view," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 45(4), pages 703-730, November.
    2. Basu, Susanto & Fernald, John G., 1995. "Are apparent productive spillovers a figment of specification error?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 165-188, August.
    3. Greenwood, Jeremy & Hercowitz, Zvi & Krusell, Per, 2000. "The role of investment-specific technological change in the business cycle," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 91-115, January.
    4. D. W. Jorgenson & Z. Griliches, 1967. "The Explanation of Productivity Change," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 34(3), pages 249-283.
    5. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Productivity, R&D, and the Data Constraint," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 347-374, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Robert M. Solow, 1956. "A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 70(1), pages 65-94.
    7. Robert J. Gordon, 2000. "Does the "New Economy" Measure Up to the Great Inventions of the Past?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 49-74, Fall.
    8. Richard G. Lipsey, 1997. "Macroeconomic Theory and Policy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1138.
    9. Hulten, Charles R, 1979. "On the "Importance" of Productivity Change," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 126-136, March.
    10. Hall, Robert E, 1988. "The Relation between Price and Marginal Cost in U.S. Industry," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(5), pages 921-947, October.
    11. Crafts, Nicholas F R, 1996. "The First Industrial Revolution: A Guided Tour for Growth Economists," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(2), pages 197-201, May.
    12. Charles R. Hulten, 2000. "Total Factor Productivity: A Short Biography," NBER Working Papers 7471, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Freeman, Chris & Louca, Francisco, 2002. "As Time Goes By: From the Industrial Revolutions to the Information Revolution," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199251056.
    14. Richard G. Lipsey, 1997. "Microeconomics, Growth and Political Economy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1225.
    15. Harberger, Arnold C, 1998. "A Vision of the Growth Process," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(1), pages 1-32, March.
    16. Carlaw, Kenneth I. & Lipsey, Richard G., 2002. "Externalities, technological complementarities and sustained economic growth," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1305-1315, December.
    17. W. Diewert & Alice Nakamura, 2003. "Index Number Concepts, Measures and Decompositions of Productivity Growth," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 127-159, April.
    18. Alwyn Young, 1992. "A Tale of Two Cities: Factor Accumulation and Technical Change in Hong Kong and Singapore," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1992, Volume 7, pages 13-64, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Greenwood, Jeremy & Hercowitz, Zvi & Krusell, Per, 1997. "Long-Run Implications of Investment-Specific Technological Change," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(3), pages 342-362, June.
    20. Caballero, Ricardo J. & Lyons, Richard K., 1990. "Internal versus external economies in European industry," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 805-826, June.
    21. Pack, Howard & Westphal, Larry E., 1986. "Industrial strategy and technological change : Theory versus reality," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 87-128, June.
    22. Westphal, Larry E, 1990. "Industrial Policy in an Export-Propelled Economy: Lessons from South Korea's Experience," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 4(3), pages 41-59, Summer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kenneth I. Carlaw & Richard G. Lipsey, 2003. "Productivity, Technology and Economic Growth: What is the Relationship?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(3), pages 457-495, July.
    2. Les T. Oxley & Kenneth I. Carlaw, 2004. "ICT Diffusion and Economic Growth in New Zealand," Econometric Society 2004 Australasian Meetings 167, Econometric Society.
    3. Charles R. Hulten, 2000. "Total Factor Productivity: A Short Biography," NBER Working Papers 7471, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Kevin J. Stiroh, 2002. "Information Technology and the U.S. Productivity Revival: What Do the Industry Data Say?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1559-1576, December.
    5. Hulten, Charles R., 2010. "Growth Accounting," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 987-1031, Elsevier.
    6. 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.
    7. Voskoboynikov, Ilya B., 2012. "New measures of output, labour and capital in industries of the Russian economy," GGDC Research Memorandum GD-123, Groningen Growth and Development Centre, University of Groningen.
    8. Charles Steindel & Kevin J. Stiroh, 2001. "Productivity: what is it and why do we care about it?," Staff Reports 122, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
    9. repec:dgr:rugggd:gd-123 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Emilian Dobrescu, 2006. "Integration of Macroeconomic Behavioural Relationships and the Input-output Block (Romanian Modelling Experience)," EcoMod2006 272100018, EcoMod.
    11. Jones, C.I., 2016. "The Facts of Economic Growth," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & Harald Uhlig (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 3-69, Elsevier.
    12. Kee Hiau Looi, 2004. "Estimating Productivity When Primal and Dual TFP Accounting Fail: An Illustration Using Singapore's Industries," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-40, October.
    13. 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.
    14. Ceyhun Elgin & Selman Çakır, 2015. "Technological progress and scientific indicators: a panel data analysis," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 263-281, April.
    15. Lindström, Tomas, 1999. "External Economies at the Firm Level: Evidence from Swedish Manufacturing," Working Paper Series 89, Sveriges Riksbank (Central Bank of Sweden).
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Kee, Hiau Looi, 2002. "Markups, returns to scale, and productivity : a case study of Singapore's manufacturing sector," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2857, The World Bank.
    19. Oulton, Nicholas, 2007. "Investment-specific technological change and growth accounting," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 1290-1299, May.
    20. Carlaw, Kenneth I. & Oxley, Les, 2008. "Resolving the productivity paradox," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 313-318.
    21. Mark Knell & Simone Vannuccini, 2022. "Tools and concepts for understanding disruptive technological change after Schumpeter," Jena Economics Research Papers 2022-005, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.

    More about this item

    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:cje:issued:v:37:y:2004:i:4:p:1118-1150. 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: Prof. Werner Antweiler (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ceaaaea.html .

    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.