IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sls/ipmsls/v44y20231.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Rise of Pro-Productivity Institutions: A Review of Recent Developments

Author

Listed:
  • Dirk Pilat

Abstract

This article reviews the recent analytical work and policy recommendations of eleven national productivity commissions, i.e. Australia, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Portugal, and the United Kingdom. It finds several differences between the commissions as regards institutional set-up, composition, and degree of independence, amongst others. The commissions have much more in common in their analytical and policy work. This likely reflects common challenges, such as the slowdown in productivity and the COVID-19 crisis, as well as structural trends such as digitalization. It also reflects a shared understanding of the main drivers of productivity, notably investment, human capital, innovation, digitalization and creative destruction, and the policies affecting those drivers. The article also finds some areas that have not yet received much attention from commissions, such as the link between the environment and productivity or the relationship between productivity, wages, and inequality. The rise of productivity commissions across the OECD area provides a rich source of analysis and policy learning that should be drawn on by academics, policy makers and others interested in productivity.

Suggested Citation

  • Dirk Pilat, 2023. "The Rise of Pro-Productivity Institutions: A Review of Recent Developments," International Productivity Monitor, Centre for the Study of Living Standards, vol. 44, pages 3-33, Fall.
  • Handle: RePEc:sls:ipmsls:v:44:y:2023:1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.csls.ca/ipm/44/IPM_44_Pilat.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carol Corrado & Charles Hulten & Daniel Sichel, 2005. "Measuring Capital and Technology: An Expanded Framework," NBER Chapters, in: Measuring Capital in the New Economy, pages 11-46, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Sean Dougherty & Andrea Renda, 2017. "Pro-Productivity Institutions: Learning from National Experience," International Productivity Monitor, Centre for the Study of Living Standards, vol. 32, pages 196-217, Spring.
    3. Cárdenas Rodríguez, Miguel & Haščič, Ivan & Souchier, Martin, 2018. "Environmentally Adjusted Multifactor Productivity: Methodology and Empirical Results for OECD and G20 Countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 147-160.
    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. Kyoji Fukao & Cristiano Perugini, 2021. "The Long‐Run Dynamics of the Labor Share in Japan," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 67(2), pages 445-480, June.
    2. Qing Li & Long Hai Vo, 2021. "Intangible Capital and Innovation: An Empirical Analysis of Vietnamese Enterprises," Economics Discussion / Working Papers 21-02, The University of Western Australia, Department of Economics.
    3. Anmol Bhandari & Ellen R. McGrattan, 2017. "Sweat Equity in U.S. Private Business," Staff Report 560, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
    4. Carol Corrado & Mary O'Mahony & Lea Samek, 2020. "Measuring education services using lifetime incomes," Economic Statistics Centre of Excellence (ESCoE) Discussion Papers ESCoE DP-2020-02, Economic Statistics Centre of Excellence (ESCoE).
    5. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Fernández, Gastón P. & Rammer, Christian, 2023. "Artificial intelligence and firm-level productivity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 188-205.
    6. De, Supriyo, 2014. "Intangible capital and growth in the ‘new economy’: Implications of a multi-sector endogenous growth model," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 25-42.
    7. Emanuele Giovannetti & Claudio Piga, 2023. "The multifaceted nature of cooperation for innovation, ICT and innovative outcomes: evidence from UK Microdata," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 13(3), pages 639-666, September.
    8. Sebastien Bradley & Estelle Dauchy & Makoto Hasegawa, 2018. "Investor valuations of Japan’s adoption of a territorial tax regime: quantifying the direct and competitive effects of international tax reform," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 25(3), pages 581-630, June.
    9. Ellen R. McGrattan & Edward C. Prescott, 2005. "Taxes, Regulations, and the Value of U.S. and U.K. Corporations," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(3), pages 767-796.
    10. Lisa Evers & Helen Miller & Christoph Spengel, 2015. "Intellectual property box regimes: effective tax rates and tax policy considerations," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 22(3), pages 502-530, June.
    11. Ellen McGrattan, 2012. "Transition to FDI Openness: Reconciling Theory and Evidence," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 15(4), pages 437-458, October.
    12. Alistair Munro, 2021. "Comment on “Green Innovation and Finance in Asia”," Asian Economic Policy Review, Japan Center for Economic Research, vol. 16(1), pages 88-89, January.
    13. Sheng, Yu & Zhao, Shiji & Yang, Sansi, 2021. "Weather shocks, adaptation and agricultural TFP: A cross-region comparison of Australian Broadacre farms," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    14. Bart van Ark, 2015. "From Mind the Gap to Closing the Gap. Avenues to Reverse Stagnation in Europe through Investment and Productivity Growth," European Economy - Discussion Papers 006, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    15. Ellen R. McGrattan & Edward C. Prescott, 2010. "Unmeasured Investment and the Puzzling US Boom in the 1990s," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(4), pages 88-123, October.
    16. Edquist, Harald, 2009. "How Much does Sweden Invest in Intangible Assets?," Working Paper Series 785, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    17. Magnus Lodefalk, 2014. "The role of services for manufacturing firm exports," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 150(1), pages 59-82, February.
    18. Nikulainen, Tuomo & Pajarinen, Mika, 2013. "Industry restructuring in the ICT sector – What does labor mobility tell us about skill relatedness and knowledge spillovers?," ETLA Working Papers 17, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    19. Felix Roth, 2022. "Revisiting Intangible Capital and Labor Productivity Growth, 2000–2015: Accounting for the Crisis and Economic Recovery in the EU," Contributions to Economics, in: Intangible Capital and Growth, chapter 0, pages 17-42, Springer.
    20. Clayton, Tony & Dal Borgo, Mariela & Haskel, Jonathan, 2009. "An Innovation Index Based on Knowledge Capital Investment: Definition and Results for the UK Market Sector," IZA Discussion Papers 4021, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    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:sls:ipmsls:v:44:y:2023:1. 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: CSLS (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cslssca.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.