IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/129021.html

The rise of the knowledge economy: Productivity measurement challenges

Author

Listed:
  • DiMaria, charles-henri

Abstract

This document examines how three structural megatrends—the expansion of services, the diffusion of ICT, and deepening globalization - have reshaped the production structure and, by extension, the measurement of productivity in advanced economies. It argues that classical growth‑accounting approaches, rooted in Solow (1957), under‑state performance in knowledge‑based systems because they insufficiently capture the contribution of intangible assets. Using experimental macroeconomic estimates of intangibles from EUKLEMS–INTANProd applied to Luxembourg and a set of comparator economies (US and EU peers), the analysis shows that including intangibles raises the level of value added per hour and modestly alters growth rankings, with Luxembourg’s post‑2007 decline turning into a slight positive trend—yet still falling short of its pre‑2007 trajectory. While measurement constraints and data comparability issues remain, the results align more closely with a knowledge‑based economy narrative and provide a practical foundation for improving productivity metrics going forward.

Suggested Citation

  • DiMaria, charles-henri, 2026. "The rise of the knowledge economy: Productivity measurement challenges," MPRA Paper 129021, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:129021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/129021/1/MPRA_paper_129021.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Haskel, J & Corrado, C & Jona-Lasinio, C & Iommi, M, 2012. "Intangible capital and growth in advanced economies: measurement methods and comparative results," Working Papers 9913, Imperial College, London, Imperial College Business School.
    2. Leonard I. Nakamura, 2001. "What is the U.S. gross investment in intangibles? (At least) one trillion dollars a year!," Working Papers 01-15, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
    3. Dany-Knedlik, Geraldine & Kämpfe, Martina & Knedlik, Tobias, 2021. "The appropriateness of the macroeconomic imbalance procedure for Central and Eastern European Countries," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 48(1), pages 123-139.
    4. Barro, Robert J. & Lee, Jong Wha, 2013. "A new data set of educational attainment in the world, 1950–2010," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 184-198.
    5. Psacharopoulos, George, 1994. "Returns to investment in education: A global update," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 22(9), pages 1325-1343, September.
    6. Carol Coorado & Jonathan Haskel & Cecilia Iona Lasinio & Massimiliano Iommi, 2012. "Intangible Capital and Growth Strategies for Advanced Economies: Measurement and Comparative Results," Working Papers LuissLab 12101, Dipartimento di Economia e Finanza, LUISS Guido Carli.
    7. Indra Abeysekera, 2008. "Intellectual capital practices of firms and the commodification of labour," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 21(1), pages 36-48, January.
    8. repec:eme:aaaj00:aaaj-03-2017-2873 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Haskel, Jonathan & Iommi, Massimiliano, 2012. "Intangible Capital and Growth in Advanced Economies: Measurement and Comparative Results," CEPR Discussion Papers 9061, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    10. Eiji Fujii, 2019. "What Does Trade Openness Measure?," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 81(4), pages 868-888, August.
    11. Leonard I. Nakamura, 1999. "Intangibles: what put the new in the new economy?," Business Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, issue Jul, pages 3-16.
    12. Indra Abeysekera, 2008. "Intellectual capital practices of firms and the commodification of labour," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 21(1), pages 36-48, January.
    13. repec:eme:aaaj00:09513570810842313 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Philippe van Gruisen & Martijn Huysmans, 2020. "The Early Warning System and policymaking in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(3), pages 451-473, September.
    15. Subhash Abhayawansa & Mark Aleksanyan & Suresh Cuganesan, 2018. "Conceptualisation of intellectual capital in analysts’ narratives: a performative view," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 31(3), pages 950-969, March.
    16. Charles Goldfinger, 1997. "Intangible Economy and its Implications for Statistics and Statisticians," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 65(2), pages 191-220, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. DiMaria, Charles-Henri, 2026. "Intangibles in tangible productivity discrepancies," MPRA Paper 129321, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Perotti, Enrico & Döttling, Robin, 2017. "Secular Trends and Technological Progress," CEPR Discussion Papers 12519, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    2. Ander Perez-Orive & Andrea Caggese, 2017. "Capital Misallocation and Secular Stagnation," 2017 Meeting Papers 382, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    3. Chiara Criscuolo & Angelo Secchi, 2016. "Resources (mis)allocation, innovation and the competitiveness of Europe," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 43(1), pages 1-9, March.
    4. Wang, Xiaoying & Sadiq, Ramla & Khan, Tahseen Mohsan & Wang, Rong, 2021. "Industry 4.0 and intellectual capital in the age of FinTech," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    5. Pedro Bento & Diego Restuccia, 2017. "Misallocation, Establishment Size, and Productivity," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 267-303, July.
    6. David Noble & Michael B. Charles & Robyn Keast, 2023. "Valuing intangible outcomes from the Cooperative Research Centres‐Projects program," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(1), pages 47-62, March.
    7. Marta Paczos, 2018. "Modelling the Economic Effects of Trade Policies – A Submission to the Treasury and International Trade Committees inquiry into implications of the UK's approach to international trade," National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) Policy Papers 07, National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
    8. Kevin J. Fox & Peter Goodridge & Jonathan Haskel & Gavin Wallis, 2017. "Spillovers from R&D and Other Intangible Investment: Evidence from UK Industries," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 63, pages 22-48, February.
    9. Chen, Wen & Niebel, Thomas & Saam, Marianne, 2016. "Are intangibles more productive in ICT-intensive industries? Evidence from EU countries," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 471-484.
    10. Tristan Auvray & Cédric Durand & Joel Rabinovich & Cecilia Rikap, 2020. "Financialization's conservation and transformation: from Mark I to Mark II," Working Papers hal-03079425, HAL.
    11. Georg Licht & Bettina Peters & Christian Köhler & Franz Schwiebacher, 2014. "The Potential Contribution of Innovation Systems to Socio-Ecological Transition. WWWforEurope Deliverable No. 4," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 47502.
    12. Dan ANDREWS & Chiara CRISCUOLO & Dirk PILAT, 2015. "The Future of Productivity Improving the Diffusion of Technology and Knowledge," Communications & Strategies, IDATE, Com&Strat dept., vol. 1(100), pages 85-105, 4th quart.
    13. Kyoji Fukao, 2013. "Explaining Japan's Unproductive Two Decades," Asian Economic Policy Review, Japan Center for Economic Research, vol. 8(2), pages 193-213, December.
    14. Ni, Qingshan & Zhang, Hao & Lu, Yanjin, 2023. "Way to measure Intangible capital for innovation-driven economic growth: Evidence from China," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 156-172.
    15. Perotti, Enrico & Döttling, Robin, 2019. "Redistributive Growth," CEPR Discussion Papers 13984, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    16. Szalavetz, Andrea, 2012. "Az immateriális beruházások és a nem közvetlenül a termelésben foglalkoztatottak szerepe a gazdasági felzárkózásban [The role intangible investments and non-production workers play in economic catching up - Results of a surveyY]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(11), pages 1187-1206.
    17. Carol A. Corrado & Janet X. Hao, 2014. "Brands As Productive Assets: Concepts, Measurement, and Global Trends," WIPO Economic Research Working Papers 13, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division.
    18. Haskel, J & Corrado, C & Jona-Lasinio, C & Iommi, M, 2013. "Innovation and intangible investment in Europe, Japan and the US," Working Papers 11139, Imperial College, London, Imperial College Business School.
    19. Cecilia Jona-Lasinio & Stefano Manzocchi, 2014. "Intangible Assets and Productivity Growth Differentials across EU Economies: The Role of ICT and R&D," Rivista di Politica Economica, SIPI Spa, issue 1, pages 355-381, January-M.
    20. Gunther Tichy, 2015. "Wirtschaftsstandort Österreich – von der "Überholspur" aufs "Abstellgleis"," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 88(8), pages 635-648, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • O4 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity
    • O40 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - General

    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:pra:mprapa:129021. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.