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

Disaggregate Productivity Comparisons: Sectoral Convergence in OECD Countries

  • Johannes Van Biesebroeck

International comparisons of productivity have used exchange rates or purchasing power parity (PPP) to make output comparable across countries. While aggregate PPP holds well in the long run, sectoral deviations are very persistent. It raises the need for a currency conversion factor at the same level of aggregation as the output that is compared. Mapping prices from household expenditure surveys into the industrial classification of sectors and adjusting for taxes and international trade, I obtain an expenditure-based sector-specific PPP. Using detailed price data for 1985, 1990, 1993, and 1996, I test whether the sectoral PPPs adequately capture differential changes in relative prices between countries. For agriculture and the majority of industrial sectors, but not for most service sectors, sectoral PPP is preferred over aggregate PPP. Using the most appropriate conversion factor for each industry, productivity convergence is found to be taking place in all but a few industries for a group of 14 OECD countries. The results are robust to the base year used for the currency conversion.

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://www.economics.utoronto.ca/public/workingPapers/tecipa-290.pdf
File Function: Main Text
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University of Toronto, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number tecipa-290.

as
in new window

Length: 41 pages
Date of creation: 18 Jun 2007
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:tor:tecipa:tecipa-290
Contact details of provider: Postal: 150 St. George Street, Toronto, Ontario
Phone: (416) 978-5283

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. Jim Malley & Anton Muscatelli & Ulrich Woitek, 2003. "Some new international comparisons of productivity performance at the sectoral level," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 166(1), pages 85-104.
  2. Wong, Wei-Kang, 2006. "OECD convergence: A sectoral decomposition exercise," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 93(2), pages 210-214, November.
  3. Andrew B. Bernard & Charles I. Jones, 2001. "Comparing Apples to Oranges: Productivity Convergence and Measurement across Industries and Countries: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 1168-1169, September.
  4. Funk, Mark & Strauss, Jack, 2003. "Panel tests of stochastic convergence: TFP transmission within manufacturing industries," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 78(3), pages 365-371, March.
  5. Engel, Charles & Rogers, John H, 1996. "How Wide Is the Border?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(5), pages 1112-25, December.
  6. Ariel Pakes, 2003. "A Reconsideration of Hedonic Price Indexes with an Application to PC's," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(5), pages 1578-1596, December.
  7. Dowrick, Steve & Quiggin, John, 1997. "True Measures of GDP and Convergence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(1), pages 41-64, March.
  8. Robert J. Hill, 1999. "Comparing Price Levels across Countries Using Minimum-Spanning Trees," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(1), pages 135-142, February.
  9. James Harrigan, 1998. "Estimation of cross-country differences in industry production functions," Staff Reports 36, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
  10. Johannes Van Biesebroeck, 2009. "Disaggregate productivity comparisons: sectoral convergence in OECD countries," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 63-79, October.
  11. Durlauf, Steven N. & Quah, Danny T., 1999. "The new empirics of economic growth," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & M. Woodford (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 4, pages 235-308 Elsevier.
  12. D. S. Prasada Rao & Marcel P. Timmer, 2003. "Purchasing Power Parities for Industry Comparisons Using Weighted Elteto-Koves-Szulc (EKS) Methods," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 49(4), pages 491-511, December.
  13. Charles Engel & John H. Rogers, 2004. "European product market integration after the euro," Economic Policy, CEPR;CES;MSH, vol. 19(39), pages 347-384, 07.
  14. Dirk Pilat, 1996. "Labour Productivity Levels in OECD Countries: Estimates for Manufacturing and Selected Service Sectors," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 169, OECD Publishing.
  15. Scott Bradford, 2003. "Paying the Price: Final Goods Protection in OECD Countries," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(1), pages 24-37, February.
  16. Hooper, Peter & Larin, Kathryn A, 1989. "International Comparisons of Labor Costs in Manufacturing," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 35(4), pages 335-55, December.
  17. Arcelus, Francisco J. & Arocena, Pablo, 2000. "Convergence and productive efficiency in fourteen OECD countries: A non-parametric frontier approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 105-117, June.
  18. Bernard, Andrew B & Jones, Charles I, 1996. "Comparing Apples to Oranges: Productivity Convergence and Measurement across Industries and Countries," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(5), pages 1216-38, December.
  19. Anders Sorensen, 2001. "Comparing Apples to Oranges: Productivity Convergence and Measurement across Industries and Countries: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 1160-1167, September.
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:tor:tecipa:tecipa-290. 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: (RePEc Maintainer)

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.