IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Measuring Multifactor Productivity Growth


  • Anita Wölfl

    (CEPII, Paris)

  • Dana Hajkova

    (Czech National Bank)


This paper quantifies and examines the contribution of capital, labour and multifactor productivity (MFP) to GDP growth and analyses the role of measurement of capital and labour inputs for the MFP estimate, using a comprehensive growth accounting exercise for 14 OECD countries. For most OECD countries, the strongest contributions to GDP growth over the past decade have come from growth in total capital input and MFP. This is to some extent related to an increasing role of information and telecommunication technologies in economic growth, particularly over the 1995-2003 period. The importance of measurement issues varies substantially with the type of measurement issue being considered. Substantial differences are observed between employment and hours worked based MFP growth rates. Also, the respective weights with which capital and labour enter the growth accounting equation, and thus, the assumptions concerning the efficiency of production and competition in product markets, significantly influence the resulting MFP estimate. Finally, the results suggest that policy conclusions on the basis of different empirical studies should be made very carefully, in particular as regards the time period for which the respective studies have been undertaken, as well as whether actual or trended time series are being considered. Ce document évalue et examine la contribution du capital, de la main-d'oeuvre et de la productivité globale des facteurs (PGF) à la croissance du PIB, et analyse le rôle de la mesure des apports de capital et de travail dans l'estimation de la PGF, par un travail complet de quantification comptable de la croissance portant sur 14 pays de l'OCDE. Dans la plupart des cas, c'est la croissance des apports totaux de capital et celle de la PGF qui ont contribué le plus fortement à la croissance du PIB ces dix dernières années. Cette évolution est liée dans une certaine mesure au rôle de plus en plus grand des technologies de l'information et de la communication dans la croissance économique, en particulier pendant la période 1995-2003. L'importance des questions de mesure varie beaucoup en fonction de leur type. On observe des différences considérables entre les taux de croissance de la PGF fondés sur l'emploi et sur les heures travaillées. En outre, la part relative du capital et du travail dans l'équation comptable de la croissance et, par conséquent, les hypothèses concernant l'efficacité de la production et la concurrence sur les marchés de produits, influent sensiblement sur l'estimation de la PGF obtenue. Enfin, il semble qu'on ne puisse tirer de conclusions des différentes études empiriques qu'en exerçant la plus grande prudence, en particulier en vérifiant la période à laquelle ces études ont été effectuées, et en déterminant si les séries chronologiques considérées sont des séries réelles ou des séries de tendances.

Suggested Citation

  • Anita Wölfl & Dana Hajkova, 2007. "Measuring Multifactor Productivity Growth," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2007/5, OECD Publishing.
  • Handle: RePEc:oec:stiaaa:2007/5-en

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Klette, Tor Jakob, 1999. "Market Power, Scale Economies and Productivity: Estimates from a Panel of Establishment Data," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(4), pages 451-476, December.
    2. Zvi Griliches & Jacques Mairesse, 1995. "Production Functions: The Search for Identification," NBER Working Papers 5067, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Sjoholm, Fredrik & Lipsey, Robert E, 2006. "Foreign Firms and Indonesian Manufacturing Wages: An Analysis with Panel Data," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 55(1), pages 201-221, October.
    4. Rachel Griffith, 1999. "Using the ARD establishment level data to look at foreign ownership and productivity in the UK," IFS Working Papers W99/06, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    5. Klette, Tor Jakob & Griliches, Zvi, 1996. "The Inconsistency of Common Scale Estimators When Output Prices Are Unobserved and Endogenous," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(4), pages 343-361, July-Aug..
    6. Ralf Martin, 2005. "Productivity Dispersion, Competition and Productivity Measurement," CEP Discussion Papers dp0692, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    7. Blundell, Richard & Bond, Stephen, 1998. "Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 115-143, August.
    8. Dixit, Avinash K & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1977. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 297-308, June.
    9. Chad Syverson, 2004. "Market Structure and Productivity: A Concrete Example," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(6), pages 1181-1222, December.
    10. Davies, Stephen W & Lyons, Bruce R, 1991. "Characterising Relative Performance: The Productivity Advantage of Foreign Owned Firms in the UK," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(4), pages 584-595, October.
    11. James R. Markusen, 1995. "The Boundaries of Multinational Enterprises and the Theory of International Trade," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 169-189, Spring.
    12. Wolfgang Keller, 2004. "International Technology Diffusion," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(3), pages 752-782, September.
    13. Rachel Griffith & Helen Simpson, 2004. "Characteristics of Foreign-Owned Firms in British Manufacturing," NBER Chapters,in: Seeking a Premier Economy: The Economic Effects of British Economic Reforms, 1980-2000, pages 147-180 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Olley, G Steven & Pakes, Ariel, 1996. "The Dynamics of Productivity in the Telecommunications Equipment Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(6), pages 1263-1297, November.
    15. Malcolm Baker & C. Fritz Foley & Jeffrey Wurgler, 2004. "The Stock Market and Investment: Evidence from FDI Flows," NBER Working Papers 10559, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. John M. Abowd & Robert H. Creecy & Francis Kramarz, 2002. "Computing Person and Firm Effects Using Linked Longitudinal Employer-Employee Data," Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics Technical Papers 2002-06, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    17. James Levinsohn & Amil Petrin, 2000. "Estimating Production Functions Using Inputs to Control for Unobservables," NBER Working Papers 7819, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Helpman, Elhanan, 1984. "A Simple Theory of International Trade with Multinational Corporations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 92(3), pages 451-471, June.
    19. Manuel Arellano & Stephen Bond, 1991. "Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 58(2), pages 277-297.
    20. Haijime Katayama & Shihua Lu & James Tybout, 2003. "Why Plant-Level Productivity Studies are Often Misleading, and an Alternative Approach to Interference," NBER Working Papers 9617, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Alexander Eickelpasch & Georg Erber, 2014. "Analyse der Ansatzpunkte der volkswirtschaftlichen Produktivitätsanalyse von wissensintensiven Dienstleistungen in der amtlichen Statistik: Endbericht; Forschungsprojekt im Auftrag des Fraunhofer-Inst," DIW Berlin: Politikberatung kompakt, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, volume 80, number pbk80.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:oec:stiaaa:2007/5-en. 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: (). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.