IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Long Term Implications of the ICT Revolution: Applying the Lessons of Growth Theory and Growth Accounting

  • Nicholas Oulton

How big a boost to long run growth can countries expect from the ICT revolution? I use the results of growth accounting and the insights from a two-sector growth model to answer this question. The use of a two-sector rather than a one-sector model is required because of the very rapid rate at which the prices of ICT products have fallen in the past and are expected to fall in the future. According to the two-sector model, the main boost to growth comes from ICT use, not ICT production. Even a country which has zero ICT production can benefit via improving terms of trade. In the long run, the falling relative price of ICT products boosts the growth of GDP and consumption by inducing faster accumulation of ICT capital. I quantify this effect on the long run growth rate of 15 European and 4 non-European countries, using data from the EU KLEMS database. The ICT intensity of production (the ICT income share) is much lower in many European countries than it is in the United States or Sweden. Nevertheless the contribution to the long run growth of labour productivity stemming from even the current levels of ICT intensity is substantial: about half a percent per annum on average in the countries studied here. Eventually, the ICT revolution may diffuse more widely so ICT intensity may reach at least the same level as currently in the U.S. or Sweden, which would add a further 0.2 percentage points per annum to long run growth.

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: http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/dp1027.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Centre for Economic Performance, LSE in its series CEP Discussion Papers with number dp1027.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Nov 2010
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cep:cepdps:dp1027
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://cep.lse.ac.uk/_new/publications/series.asp?prog=CEP

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. Dale W. Jorgenson & Mun S. Ho & Kevin J. Stiroh, 2008. "A Retrospective Look at the U.S. Productivity Growth Resurgence," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 3-24, Winter.
  2. Dale W. Jorgenson & Mun S. Ho & Kevin J. Stiroh, 2006. "Projecting Productivity Growth: Lessons from the US Growth Resurgence," Chapters, in: The New Economy and Beyond, chapter 2 Edward Elgar.
  3. Susanto Basu & John G. Fernald & Nicholas Oulton & Sylaja Srinivasan, 2004. "The Case of the Missing Productivity Growth, or Does Information Technology Explain Why Productivity Accelerated in the United States But Not in the United Kingdom?," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 2003, Volume 18, pages 9-82 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  4. Mirko Draca & Raffaella Sadun & John Van Reenen, 2006. "Productivity and ICT: A Review of the Evidence," CEP Discussion Papers dp0749, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
  5. Greenwood, J. & Hercowitz, Z. & Krusell, P., 1995. "Long-Run Implications of Investment-Specific Technological Change," UWO Department of Economics Working Papers 9510, University of Western Ontario, Department of Economics.
  6. Paul Schreyer, 2000. "The Contribution of Information and Communication Technology to Output Growth: A Study of the G7 Countries," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2000/2, OECD Publishing.
  7. Gilbert Cette & Jimmy Lopez, 2008. "What Explains the ICT Diffusion Gap Between the Major Industrialized Countries: An Empirical Analysis?," International Productivity Monitor, Centre for the Study of Living Standards, vol. 17, pages 28-39, Fall.
  8. Robert J. Gordon, 2003. "Exploding Productivity Growth: Context, Causes, and Implications," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 34(2), pages 207-298.
  9. Nicholas Oulton, 2005. "Ex post versus ex ante measures of the user cost of capital," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 19885, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  10. Oliner, Stephen D. & Sichel, Daniel E., 2003. "Information technology and productivity: where are we now and where are we going?," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 477-503, July.
  11. David, Paul A, 1990. "The Dynamo and the Computer: An Historical Perspective on the Modern Productivity Paradox," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 355-61, May.
  12. Bloom, Nicholas & Sadun, Raffaella & Van Reenen, John, 2007. "Americans Do I.T. Better: US Multinationals and the Productivity Miracle," CEPR Discussion Papers 6291, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  13. Christophe Cahn & Arthur Saint-Guilhem, 2008. "Potential output growth in several industrialised countries: a comparison," PSE Working Papers halshs-00586632, HAL.
  14. Bakhshi, Hasan & Larsen, Jens, 2005. "ICT-specific technological progress in the United Kingdom," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 648-669, December.
  15. Schreyer, Paul, 2002. "Computer Price Indices and International Growth and Productivity Comparisons," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 48(1), pages 15-31, March.
  16. 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.
  17. Robert J. Gordon, 2000. "Does the "New Economy" Measure up to the Great Inventions of the Past?," NBER Working Papers 7833, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  18. Oliner, Stephen D. & Sichel, Daniel E. & Stiroh, Kevin J., 2008. "Explaining a productive decade," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 633-673.
  19. Stephen D. Oliner & Daniel E. Sichel, 2000. "The resurgence of growth in the late 1990s: is information technology the story?," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2000-20, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  20. Greenwood, Jeremy & Krusell, Per, 2007. "Growth accounting with investment-specific technological progress: A discussion of two approaches," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 1300-1310, May.
  21. Venetia Bell & Pablo Burriel-Llombart & Jerry Jones, 2005. "A quality-adjusted labour input series for the United Kingdom (1975-2002)," Bank of England working papers 280, Bank of England.
  22. Perron, Pierre, 1989. "The Great Crash, the Oil Price Shock, and the Unit Root Hypothesis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(6), pages 1361-1401, November.
  23. Susanto Basu & John G. Fernald, 2008. "Information and communications technology as a general purpose technology: evidence from U.S. industry data," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, pages 1-15.
  24. 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, March.
  25. Nicholas Oulton, 2010. "Long term implications of the ICT revolution: applying the lessons of growth theory and growth accounting," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 49303, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  26. Cahn, Christophe & Saint-Guilhem, Arthur, 2007. "Potential output growth in several industrialised countries: a comparison," Working Paper Series 0828, European Central Bank.
  27. Nicholas Oulton & Sylaja Srinivasan, 2005. "Productivity growth in UK industries, 1970-2000: structural change and the role of ICT," Bank of England working papers 259, Bank of England.
  28. Mary O'Mahony & Marcel P. Timmer, 2009. "Output, Input and Productivity Measures at the Industry Level: The EU KLEMS Database," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(538), pages F374-F403, 06.
  29. Nordhaus, William D., 2005. "Schumpeterian Profits and the Alchemist Fallacy Revised," Working Papers 6, Yale University, Department of Economics.
  30. Nicholas Oulton, 2004. "Investment-specific technological change and growth accounting," Bank of England working papers 213, Bank of England.
  31. Cette, Gilbert & Mairesse, Jacques & Kocoglu, Yusuf, 2005. "ICT diffusion and potential output growth," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 231-234, May.
  32. Robert J. Barro, 1995. "Inflation and Economic Growth," NBER Working Papers 5326, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  33. Kevin J. Stiroh & Dale W. Jorgenson, 2000. "U.S. Economic Growth at the Industry Level," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 161-167, May.
  34. Nicholas Crafts, 2004. "Steam as a general purpose technology: A growth accounting perspective," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(495), pages 338-351, 04.
  35. Mauro Giorgio Marrano & Jonathan Haskel & Gavin Wallis, 2007. "What Happened to the Knowledge Economy? ICT, Intangible Investment and Britain's Productivity Record Revisited," Working Papers 603, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
  36. Dale W. Jorgenson & Kevin J. Stiroh, 2000. "Raising the Speed Limit: US Economic Growth in the Information Age," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 261, OECD Publishing.
  37. Dale W. Jorgenson & Mun S. Ho & Kevin J. Stiroh, 2004. "Will the U.S. productivity resurgence continue?," Current Issues in Economics and Finance, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, vol. 10(Dec).
  38. Bart van Ark & Mary O'Mahoney & Marcel P. Timmer, 2008. "The Productivity Gap between Europe and the United States: Trends and Causes," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 25-44, Winter.
  39. Erik Brynjolfsson & Lorin M. Hitt, 2003. "Computing Productivity: Firm-Level Evidence," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(4), pages 793-808, November.
  40. Whelan, Karl, 2003. " A Two-Sector Approach to Modeling U.S. NIPA Data," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 35(4), pages 627-56, August.
  41. Dale Jorgenson & Mun Ho & Kevin Stiroh, 2003. "Growth of US Industries and Investments in Information Technology and Higher Education," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 279-325.
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:cep:cepdps:dp1027. 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: ()

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.