IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sls/ipmsls/v50y20261.html

The Potential for Sustained Productivity Impetus from GenAI

Author

Listed:
  • Martin Neil Baily
  • David M. Byrne
  • Aidan T. Kane
  • Paul E. Soto

Abstract

With the advent of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI), the scope of AI has increased dramatically, but its effect on labour productivity remains uncertain. Some innovations raise labour productivity growth as adoption spreads but the effect fades when the market is saturated. In contrast, two types of innovation — general purpose technologies (GPTs) and inventions in the method of invention (IMIs) — have long-lasting effects on productivity growth. GPTs (1) are widely adopted, (2) spur knock-on innovations, and (3) show continual improvement, refreshing the innovation cycle. IMIs increase the efficiency of the research and development process via improvements to observation, analysis, communication, and organization. We conclude there is suggestive evidence that GenAI is both a GPT and an IMI, a sign that its adoption will lead to higher labour productivity growth in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin Neil Baily & David M. Byrne & Aidan T. Kane & Paul E. Soto, 2026. "The Potential for Sustained Productivity Impetus from GenAI," International Productivity Monitor, Centre for the Study of Living Standards, vol. 50, pages 5-26, Spring.
    • Handle: RePEc:sls:ipmsls:v:50:y:2026:1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/international-productivity-monitor-50th-issue/the-potential-for-sustained-productivity-impetus-from-genai/
    File Function: Version francaise disponible / French version available
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://csls.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/IPM_Baily_Final.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michelle Yin & Hoa Vu & Claudia Persico, 2026. "How (un)Stable Are LLM Occupational Exposure Scores? Evidence from Multi-Model Replication," NBER Working Papers 35110, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Leland D. Crane & Paul E. Soto, 2026. "AI and Coder Employment: Compiling the Evidence," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2026-018, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    3. Joshua Ettinger & Friederike E. L. Otto & E. Lisa F. Schipper, 2021. "Storytelling can be a powerful tool for science," Nature, Nature, vol. 589(7842), pages 352-352, January.
    4. Anton Korinek, 2023. "Generative AI for Economic Research: Use Cases and Implications for Economists," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(4), pages 1281-1317, December.
    5. Goldfarb, Avi & Taska, Bledi & Teodoridis, Florenta, 2023. "Could machine learning be a general purpose technology? A comparison of emerging technologies using data from online job postings," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    6. Shalabh, 2021. "Statistical inference via data science," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 184(3), pages 1155-1155, July.
    7. Trajtenberg, Manuel, 2018. "AI as the next GPT: a Political-Economy Perspective," CEPR Discussion Papers 12721, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    8. Nordhaus, William D., 2007. "Two Centuries of Productivity Growth in Computing," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 67(1), pages 128-159, March.
    9. Lipsey, Richard G. & Carlaw, Kenneth I. & Bekar, Clifford T., 2005. "Economic Transformations: General Purpose Technologies and Long-Term Economic Growth," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199290895.
    10. Mitcham, Carl & Emeritus,, 2021. "Science policy and democracy," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    11. Erik Brynjolfsson & Tom Mitchell & Daniel Rock, 2018. "What Can Machines Learn, and What Does It Mean for Occupations and the Economy?," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 108, pages 43-47, May.
    12. Timothy Bresnahan, 2024. "What innovation paths for AI to become a GPT?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 305-316, March.
    13. Shouhuai Xu & Moti Yung & Jingguo Wang, 2021. "Seeking Foundations for the Science of Cyber Security," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 263-267, April.
    14. Lisa Mandle & Analisa Shields-Estrada & Rebecca Chaplin-Kramer & Matthew G. E. Mitchell & Leah L. Bremer & Jesse D. Gourevitch & Peter Hawthorne & Justin A. Johnson & Brian E. Robinson & Jeffrey R. Sm, 2021. "Increasing decision relevance of ecosystem service science," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 4(2), pages 161-169, February.
    15. Jean J. Wang & Sarah X. Shao & Fred Y. Ye, 2021. "Identifying 'seed' papers in sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 6001-6011, July.
    16. Aqsa Saeed & Shaheera Qureshi & Tahira & Waqas Manzoor Bhutta, 2021. "Applications of Nanobiotechnology in Plant Sciences," Biomedical Journal of Scientific & Technical Research, Biomedical Research Network+, LLC, vol. 35(1), pages 27236-27240, April.
    17. Johan S. G. Chu & James A. Evans, 2021. "Slowed canonical progress in large fields of science," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 118(41), pages 2021636118-, October.
    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. Martin Baily & David Byrne & Aidan Kane & Paul Soto, 2025. "Generative AI at the Crossroads: Light Bulb, Dynamo, or Microscope?," Papers 2505.14588, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2025.
    2. Martin Neil Baily & David M. Byrne & Aidan T. Kane & Paul E. Soto, 2025. "Generative AI at the Crossroads: Light Bulb, Dynamo, or Microscope?," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2025-053, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    3. Paul X. McCarthy & Rasika Amarasiri & Xian Gong, 2026. "Translation Readiness Index: Measuring the Semantic Proximity of Research to Patented Science," Papers 2606.31102, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2026.
    4. Li, Xian & Du, Haixing & Bu, Yi & Ai, Mingshu & Huang, Junjie & Jia, Tao, 2025. "Innovation lineage structure: A graph structure in publications of scholars and its association with disruptiveness," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4).
    5. Deng Cheng & Zhang Xue & Yang Zhibo & Zhang Mingze, 2025. "Impact of interdisciplinarity on disruptive innovation: the moderating role of collaboration pattern and collaboration size," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 130(4), pages 2379-2401, April.
    6. Liyin Zhang & Yuchen Qian & Chao Ma & Jiang Li, 2023. "Continued collaboration shortens the transition period of scientists who move to another institution," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(3), pages 1765-1784, March.
    7. Zsolt Kohus & Gergely Ferenc Lendvai & Dóra Vizvári & Márton Demeter & Sándor Soós & Beáta Bavalicsné Kerekes & Eszter Lukács, 2025. "Exploring the collaboration networks between highly cited researchers in highly cited papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 130(11), pages 6513-6540, November.
    8. Liu, Xingpeng & Zeng, An & Cui, Xiaohua, 2026. "Breaking through the constraints of academic social capital: Insights from top scientists’ collaboration strategies," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 20(2).
    9. Xinhua Chai & Qiang Wu, 2025. "What kind of research network configurations lead to high academic productivity for young management scholars?—A fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 130(5), pages 2705-2748, May.
    10. Angelo Salatino & Francesco Osborne & Diego Reforgiato Recupero & Simone Angioni & Enrico Motta, 2026. "Does Diversity of Expertise Drive Citation Impact? Evidence from Computer Science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 131(2), pages 1119-1146, February.
    11. Bornmann, Lutz & Haunschild, Robin, 2024. "The Prize Winner Index (PWI): A proposal for an indicator based on scientific prizes," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4).
    12. Michael Färber & Melissa Coutinho & Shuzhou Yuan, 2023. "Biases in scholarly recommender systems: impact, prevalence, and mitigation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(5), pages 2703-2736, May.
    13. Jing Liu & David A. Hyman, 2025. "Network Analysis of Innovation in Legal Scholarship: Law & Economics, Law & Society, and Empirical Legal Studies," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(4), pages 599-619, December.
    14. Baicun Li & Aruhan Bai, 2025. "The influence of grant renewal on research content: evidence from NIH-funded PIs," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 130(5), pages 2617-2638, May.
    15. Malte Hückstädt, 2023. "Ten reasons why research collaborations succeed—a random forest approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(3), pages 1923-1950, March.
    16. Cinzia Daraio & Simone Di Leo & Loet Leydesdorff, 2022. "Using the Leiden Rankings as a Heuristics: Evidence from Italian universities in the European landscape," LEM Papers Series 2022/08, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    17. Alex J. Yang & Hongcun Gong & Yuhao Wang & Chao Zhang & Sanhong Deng, 2024. "Rescaling the disruption index reveals the universality of disruption distributions in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(1), pages 561-580, January.
    18. Rainer Frietsch & Sonia Gruber & Lutz Bornmann, 2025. "The definition of highly cited researchers: the effect of different approaches on the empirical outcome," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 130(2), pages 881-907, February.
    19. Zhuanlan Sun & C. Clark Cao & Sheng Liu & Yiwei Li & Chao Ma, 2024. "Behavioral consequences of second-person pronouns in written communications between authors and reviewers of scientific papers," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-12, December.
    20. Lutz Bornmann, 2024. "Skewed distributions of scientists’ productivity: a research program for the empirical analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(4), pages 2455-2468, April.

    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:sls:ipmsls:v:50:y:2026:1. 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.