IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nzt/nztans/an25-11.html

Understanding the effect of changing industry structure on New Zealand's labour productivity slowdown

Author

Listed:

Abstract

New Zealand has experienced a significant and persistent slowdown in productivity growth over the last decade. While many advanced economies have experienced this slowdown, New Zealand has been more adversely affected due to consistently lower than OECD-average labour productivity. Treasury (2024) looked at the drivers of New Zealand’s productivity slowdown, but did not examine the industry sources of our slowing productivity growth. This paper fills a gap by quantifying the productivity slowdown through shift-share decomposition to examine the sources by industry. The analysis captures the shift of firm productivity within each industry, the shift of labour between low and high labour productivity industries, and the shift of labour between low and high labour productivity growth industries. This type of analysis has not been published in New Zealand for over a decade (see Meehan, 2014). The updated analysis includes a more up-to-date data set which captures the effect of two significant shocks – the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) and COVID-19 pandemic. We find that New Zealand’s labour productivity slowdown is broad based across industries. Overall our results are similar to Meehan (2014), showing that New Zealand’s slowing labour productivity growth is primarily due to low within-industry labour productivity growth, where the distribution of firm productivity plays a significant role in explaining within-industry effects (Syverson, 2011). The across industry effect is small and has mixed effects, but shows on average stronger reallocation towards low labour productivity industries over the period, resulting in a drag on overall labour productivity growth. We also look at the reallocation trends across the OECD to see if they reflect similar dynamics, particularly in light of large economic shocks (eg, GFC and COVID-19). Other OECD countries have seen a gradual increase in aggregate labour productivity growth since the GFC in contrast to New Zealand’s slowing growth over this period. Between 2012 and 2021, 18 of the 27 sample countries exhibit an increasing trend, including 6 of the 8 Small Advanced Economies (SAE’s). Much like New Zealand, the within-industry effect dominates for the OECD. However, the OECD average also has positive across-industry effects, which appear to be consistent among individual sample countries. Some caution is needed when interpreting these results due to data and comparability issues. Differences in structural reforms, their timing, and the extent of industry changes across countries complicate cross-economy comparisons. But the results suggests that overall, OECD countries are on average seeing a movement of labour into relatively higher labour productivity industries in contrast to New Zealand. Both New Zealand and the OECD average show evidence of the shift towards a services-based economy, with labour moving out of the Agriculture and Manufacturing industries, and into industries such as Professional, Scientific and Technical Services, Information Media and Telecommunications, and Healthcare. However there is considerable heterogeneity of labour productivity across industries in the service sector. Firm-level analysis would provide richer insights into the within-industry component, as it captures micro-level reallocations including firm entry and exit, labour reallocation between firms, and productivity changes. This approach would reflect reallocation dynamics at the firm level, offering a more granular perspective. Similar analysis in other countries has shown this heterogeneity at the firm level, particularly between frontier and laggard firms (ECB, 2021). Due to data availability, this paper is constrained to industry level insights. Better understanding of these industry and firm dynamics could enhance our knowledge of productivity drivers, particularly how reallocation within industries might align with firms that engage in exporting, innovation, and increased capital investment. The interplay between tradeable and non-tradeable sectors and our ongoing transition to services also deserves attention, as the propensity to export may differ for New Zealand compared with other OECD countries. These are all areas for further work.

Suggested Citation

  • Hilary Devine & Finn Smith, 2025. "Understanding the effect of changing industry structure on New Zealand's labour productivity slowdown," Treasury Analytical Notes Series an25/11, New Zealand Treasury.
  • Handle: RePEc:nzt:nztans:an25/11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.treasury.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2025-10/an25-11.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chad Syverson, 2011. "What Determines Productivity?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 49(2), pages 326-365, June.
    2. Dan Andrews & Chiara Criscuolo & Peter N. Gal, 2015. "Frontier Firms, Technology Diffusion and Public Policy: Micro Evidence from OECD Countries," OECD Productivity Working Papers 2, OECD Publishing.
    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. V. Vandenberghe, 2018. "The Contribution of Educated Workers to Firms’ Efficiency Gains: The Key Role of Proximity to the ‘Local’ Frontier," De Economist, Springer, vol. 166(3), pages 259-283, September.
    2. Pardesi, Mantej, 2024. "Productivity convergence and firm’s training strategy," ROA Research Memorandum 003, Maastricht University, Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market (ROA).
    3. Themann, Michael & Koch, Nicolas, 2021. "Catching up and falling behind: Cross-country evidence on the impact of the EU ETS on firm productivity," Ruhr Economic Papers 904, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    4. Konstantins Benkovskis & Styliani Christodoulopoulou & Olegs Tkacevs, 2025. "Adaption of Digital Technologies: the Case of Latvian Firms," Discussion Papers 2025/01, Latvijas Banka.
    5. Dolores Añón Higón & Juan A. Máñez & María E. Rochina-Barrachina & Amparo Sanchis & Juan A. Sanchis, 2022. "Firms’ distance to the European productivity frontier," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 12(2), pages 197-228, June.
    6. Afef Bouattour & Maha Kalai & Kamel Helali, 2024. "Slowdown in total factor productivity of French private companies: Between microeconomic heterogeneity and inappropriate government policies," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 45(1), pages 193-209, January.
    7. Peter Bauer & Igor Fedotenkov & Aurelien Genty & Issam Hallak & Peter Harasztosi & David Martinez Turegano & David Nguyen & Nadir Preziosi & Ana Rincon-Aznar & Miguel Sanchez Martinez, 2020. "Productivity in Europe: Trends and drivers in a service-based economy," JRC Research Reports JRC119785, Joint Research Centre.
    8. Patrick Schneider, 2018. "Decomposing differences in productivity distributions," Bank of England working papers 740, Bank of England.
    9. Lucia Foster & Cheryl Grim & John C. Haltiwanger & Zoltan Wolf, 2019. "Innovation, Productivity Dispersion, and Productivity Growth," NBER Chapters, in: Measuring and Accounting for Innovation in the Twenty-First Century, pages 103-136, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Oulton, Nicholas, 2020. "Measuring productivity: theory and British practice," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 106473, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Braunerhjelm, Pontus & Lappi, Emma, 2023. "Employees' entrepreneurial human capital and firm performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    12. Tobias Schultheiss & Uschi Backes-Gellner, 2024. "Does updating education curricula accelerate technology adoption in the workplace? Evidence from dual vocational education and training curricula in Switzerland," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 191-235, February.
    13. Alexander Murray, 2017. "What Explains the Post-2004 U.S.Productivity Slowdown?," CSLS Research Reports 2017-05, Centre for the Study of Living Standards.
    14. Erik Brynjolfsson & Wang Jin & Kristina McElheran, 2021. "The power of prediction: predictive analytics, workplace complements, and business performance," Business Economics, Palgrave Macmillan;National Association for Business Economics, vol. 56(4), pages 217-239, October.
    15. Daan Freeman & Leon Bettendorf & Harro van Heuvelen & Gerdien Meijerink, 2021. "The contribution of business dynamics to productivity growth in the Netherlands," CPB Discussion Paper 427, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    16. Diane Coyle, 2021. "The idea of productivity," Working Papers 003, The Productivity Institute.
    17. Heike Belitz & Alexander Schiersch & Torben Stühmeier, 2019. "Produktivitätsentwicklung: Potenziale in Stadt und Land [Regional and Sectoral Disparities in Germany]," Wirtschaftsdienst, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 99(5), pages 355-358, May.
    18. Ryan A. Decker & John C. Haltiwanger & Ron S. Jarmin & Javier Miranda, 2018. "Changing Business Dynamism and Productivity: Shocks vs. Responsiveness," NBER Working Papers 24236, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Natália Barbosa & Ana Paula faria, 2022. "Digital adoption and productivity: understanding micro drivers of the aggregate effect," GEE Papers 0162, Gabinete de Estratégia e Estudos, Ministério da Economia, revised Jun 2022.
    20. Antonio Ughi & Andrea Mina, 2023. "Digital Advantage: Evidence from a Policy Evaluation of Adoption Subsidies," LEM Papers Series 2023/41, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D22 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Empirical Analysis
    • L16 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Industrial Organization and Macroeconomics; Macroeconomic Industrial Structure
    • O4 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity
    • O56 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Oceania
    • O57 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Comparative Studies of Countries

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:nzt:nztans:an25/11. 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: CSS I&T Web & Publishing, The Treasury (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tregvnz.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.