IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

The effects of biased technological change on total factor productivity: empirical evidence from a sample of OECD countries

  • Cristiano Antonelli
  • Francesco Quatraro


Technological change is far from neutral. The empirical analysis of the rate and direction of technological change in a significant sample of 10 OECD countries in the years 1971-2001 confirms the strong bias of new technologies. The introduction of new and biased technologies affects the actual levels of total factor productivity when it matches the characteristics of local factor markets so that locally abundant inputs become more productive. In turn the matching between the bias of technological change and the relative abundance of production factors can be considered as the result of a path dependent process where the quality of the local knowledge infrastructure plays a central role in shaping the direction.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Springer in its journal The Journal of Technology Transfer.

Volume (Year): 35 (2010)
Issue (Month): 4 (August)
Pages: 361-383

in new window

Handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:35:y:2010:i:4:p:361-383
DOI: 10.1007/s10961-009-9134-2
Contact details of provider: Web page:

Order Information: Web:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Blundell, R. & Bond, S., 1995. "Initial Conditions and Moment Restrictions in Dynamic Panel Data Models," Economics Papers 104, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
  2. Acemoglu, Daron & Zilibotti, Fabrizio, 2000. "Productivity Differences," CEPR Discussion Papers 2498, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  3. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2005. "Localized Technological Change and Factor Markets: Constraints and Inducements to Innovation," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 200503, University of Turin.
  4. Francesco Quatraro, 2009. "Innovation, structural change and productivity growth: evidence from Italian regions, 1980--2003," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(5), pages 1001-1022, September.
  5. Paul A. David, 2005. "THE TALE OF TWO TRAVERSES Innovation and Accumulation in the First Two Centuries of U.S. Economic Growth," Macroeconomics 0502019, EconWPA.
  6. Johannes Van Biesebroeck, 2004. "Robustness of Productivity Estimates," NBER Working Papers 10303, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  7. Bernard, Andrew B & Jones, Charles I, 1996. "Comparing Apples to Oranges: Productivity Convergence and Measurement across Industries and Countries," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(5), pages 1216-38, December.
  8. Z, Griliches & Jacques Mairesse, 1997. "Production Functions : The Search for Identification," Working Papers 97-30, Centre de Recherche en Economie et Statistique.
  9. Gustavo Crespi & Chiara Criscuolo & Jonathan Haskel, 2006. "Productivity, exporting and the learning-by-exporting hypothesis: direct evidence from UK firms," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 19857, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  10. Fisher-Vanden, Karen & Jefferson, Gary H., 2008. "Technology diversity and development: Evidence from China's industrial enterprises," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 658-672, December.
  11. Dale W. Jorgenson, 1995. "Productivity, Volume 1: Postwar US Economic Growth," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262100495, March.
  12. Arellano, Manuel & Bover, Olympia, 1995. "Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 29-51, July.
  13. Daron Acemoglu, 1998. "Why Do New Technologies Complement Skills? Directed Technical Change and Wage Inequality," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 113(4), pages 1055-1089.
  14. Kenneth Carlaw & Stephen Kosempel, 2004. "The sources of total factor productivity growth: Evidence from Canadian data," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(4), pages 299-309.
  15. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
  16. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  17. Bailey, Alastair & Irz, Xavier & Balcombe, Kelvin, 2004. "Measuring productivity growth when technological change is biased--a new index and an application to UK agriculture," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 31(2-3), pages 285-295, December.
  18. Carl J. Dahlman & Jorma Routti & Pekka Ylä-Anttila, 2006. "Finland as a Knowledge Economy : Elements of Success and Lessons Learned," World Bank Publications, The World Bank, number 7138, May.
  19. A. Di Liberto & F. Pigliaru & R. Mura, 2004. "How to measure the unobservable: a panel technique for the analysis of TFP convergence," Working Paper CRENoS 200405, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
  20. Costantini, Valeria & Crespi, Francesco, 2007. "Environmental regulation and the export dynamics of energy technologies," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 200708, University of Turin.
  21. Douglas Gollin, 2001. "Getting Income Shares Right," Department of Economics Working Papers 2001-11, Department of Economics, Williams College.
  22. Felipe, Jesus & McCombie, J. S. L., 2001. "Biased Technical Change, Growth Accounting, and the Conundrum of the East Asian Miracle," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 542-565, September.
  23. Thomas Orwell Armstrong & Michael Goetz & Karen Leppel, 2000. "Technological Change Bias In The U.S. Investor-Owned Electric Utility Industry Following Potential Deregulation," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(6), pages 559-572.
  24. Francesco Caselli & Wilbur John Coleman II, 2000. "The World Technology Frontier," NBER Working Papers 7904, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  25. Ian Keay, 2000. "Canadian manufacturers' relative productivity performance, 1907-1990," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 33(4), pages 1049-1068, November.
  26. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2004. "Diffusion as a Process of Creative Adoption," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 200403, University of Turin.
  27. Nelson, Richard R, 1973. "Recent Exercises in Growth Accounting: New Understanding or Dead End?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 63(3), pages 462-68, June.
  28. D. W. Jorgenson & Z. Griliches, 1967. "The Explanation of Productivity Change," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(3), pages 249-283.
  29. Levin, Andrew & Lin, Chien-Fu & James Chu, Chia-Shang, 2002. "Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 1-24, May.
  30. Davide Consoli & Pier Paolo Patrucco, 2008. "Innovation Platforms And The Governance Of Knowledge: Evidence From Italy And The Uk," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(7-8), pages 699-716.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jtecht:v:35:y:2010:i:4:p:361-383. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla)

or (Rebekah McClure)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.