Understanding productivity trends
Market sector productivity — the output produced per hour worked — grew at an annual rate of 3.2 per cent during the five years to 1998-99, which was the fastest rate on record. In the five years to 2003-04, productivity growth eased to 2.2 per cent per year, which is around the average rate over the past four decades. On balance, business cycle fluctuations, international developments, investment in physical and human capital (including information and communication technology), and the movement of labour across industries did not cause this easing in productivity growth. Rather, these trends are apparent within a number of industries: mining, construction, utilities, wholesale trade, communications and finance and insurance. A closer inspection of these industries suggests that, with the exception of mining, the recent trends at least partly reflect an easing of growth rates towards their historical averages after the unusual productivity surge of the late 1990s.
Volume (Year): (2006)
Issue (Month): 1 (March)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Langton Crescent, PARKES ACT 2600|
Phone: +61 2 6263 2111
Fax: +61 2 6273 2614
Web page: http://www.treasury.gov.au
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- David H. Romer & Jeffrey A. Frankel, 1999. "Does Trade Cause Growth?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 379-399, June.
- Abbas Valadkhani, 2003.
"An Empirical Analysis of Australian Labour Productivity,"
Australian Economic Papers,
Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(3), pages 273-291, 09.
- Abbas Valadkhani, 2002. "An Empirical Analysis of Australian Labour Productivity," School of Economics and Finance Discussion Papers and Working Papers Series 110, School of Economics and Finance, Queensland University of Technology.
- Susanto Basu & John Fernald, 2001.
"Why Is Productivity Procyclical? Why Do We Care?,"
in: New Developments in Productivity Analysis, pages 225-302
National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Susanto Basu & John G. Fernald, 2000. "Why is productivity procyclical? Why do we care?," Working Paper Series WP-00-11, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
- Susanto Basu & John Fernald, 2000. "Why Is Productivity Procyclical? Why Do We Care?," NBER Working Papers 7940, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- John G. Fernald & Susanto Basu, 1999. "Why is productivity procyclical? Why do we care?," International Finance Discussion Papers 638, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
- Dean Parham, 2004. "Sources of Australia's Productivity Revival," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 80(249), pages 239-257, 06.
- Jyoti Rahman, 2005. "Comparing Australian and United States productivity," Economic Roundup, The Treasury, Australian Government, issue 2, pages 27-45, June.
- Graeme Davis & Gene Tunny, 2005. "International comparisons of research and development," Economic Roundup, The Treasury, Australian Government, issue 4, pages 63-82, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tsy:journl:journl_tsy_er_2006_1_1. 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: (The Treasury (Commonwealth of Australia))
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.