IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Regional Differences in Productivity Growth in the Netherlands - an Industry-level Growth Accounting


  • Lourens Broersma


  • Jouke Van Dijk



Main point in the current European policy debate is to find instruments that stimulate the growth rate of labour productivity. The reason for this is a persistent slowdown in labour productivity growth in European countries and an increasing gap in growth rates between the USA and Europe starting in the second half of the 1990’s. Labour productivity in the US is nowadays at a much steeper growth path than in Europe. What is the reason for this increasing gap between Europe and the USA? This is an important question in order to assess the measures proposed in the Lisbon Agreement by the European Union (EU) to become the world’s most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in 2010. With increasing globalisation and deregulation of international markets, productivity growth is the tool to enhance competitiveness. Therefore instruments are sought that will get the productivity growth rate in European countries back on track. One of the main explanatory factors for productivity growth is the production, use and diffusion of information and communication technology (ICT). Inklaar et al. (2003) show, however, that the main source for the European slowdown in productivity growth is not so much lagging IT use, but a deceleration of non-ICT capital deepening (i.e. lagging increase of non-ICT capital per hour worked) and, in contrast to the US, a lack of acceleration of TFP growth. TFP growth is the part of productivity growth that cannot be attributed to an increase in the capital stock per hour worked, where capital is usually subdivided in ICT capital and non-ICT capital. Daveri (2004), who applies a more rigorous definition of ICT using and ICT producing industries, by and large corroborates these results. The deceleration of non-ICT capital deepening of the nineties in Europe has coincided with a sharp rise in employment. Non-ICT capital deepening, or the growth of non-IT capital per hour worked, is clearly related to the growth rates of the price of both inputs. Faster wage growth increases non-ICT capital deepening because capital will substitute labour. An increase in the ‘price’ of non-ICT-capital, on the other hand, makes capital more expensive and leads to deceleration of non-ICT capital deepening. Inklaar et al. (2003), however, show that the impact of growth rates of wage and rental prices on non-ICT capital deepening is much stronger for the US than Europe. The small effect of wage growth in European countries implies that wage moderation might be an important reason for the slowdown of non-ICT capital deepening. Labour productivity growth in The Netherlands is at a persistently lower growth path than the European average. Since The Netherlands has been champion in wage moderation in the past decades, a natural question is whether this has led to an even slower non-ICT capital deepening than Europe or that other mechanisms have instead caused the Dutch slowdown of productivity growth. This issue will be addressed at a low spatial level: what is the reason for the Dutch slowdown, are there regions that have contributed more to the lagging productivity growth rate than others and which industries are responsible. This question will be answered using the growth accounting approach, which is also used to explain the widening of the productivity growth gap between Europe and the USA. Distinction can be made at the provincial level of The Netherlands between growth rates of value added in constant prices, number of hours worked, ICT and non-ICT capital services for eight aggregate industries. There is therefore sufficient detail to determine which industry in which province contributes positively or negatively to the lagging Dutch growth performance of the late 1990’s. This issue is useful from both an academic and a policy perspective.

Suggested Citation

  • Lourens Broersma & Jouke Van Dijk, 2005. "Regional Differences in Productivity Growth in the Netherlands - an Industry-level Growth Accounting," ERSA conference papers ersa05p62, European Regional Science Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa05p62

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Broersma, Lourens & Dijk, Jouke van, 2003. "Arbeidsproductiviteit in Fryslân : een analyse van het niveau en de groei van 1990-2000," Research Reports 2003305, University of Groningen, Urban and Regional Studies Institute (URSI).
    2. Francis Green, 1999. "It's been a hard day's night: The concentration and intensification of work in late 20th century Britain," Studies in Economics 9913, School of Economics, University of Kent.
    3. William D. Nordhaus, 2002. "Productivity Growth and the New Economy," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 33(2), pages 211-265.
    4. Timmer, Marcel P. & Ypma, Gerard & Ark, Bart van der, 2003. "IT in the European Union: driving productivity divergence?," GGDC Research Memorandum 200363, Groningen Growth and Development Centre, University of Groningen.
    5. Ciccone, Antonio & Hall, Robert E, 1996. "Productivity and the Density of Economic Activity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(1), pages 54-70, March.
    6. Erik Brynjolfsson & Chris F. Kemerer, 1996. "Network Externalities in Microcomputer Software: An Econometric Analysis of the Spreadsheet Market," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(12), pages 1627-1647, December.
    7. Glaeser, Edward L & Hedi D. Kallal & Jose A. Scheinkman & Andrei Shleifer, 1992. "Growth in Cities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(6), pages 1126-1152, December.
      • Edward L. Glaeser & Hedi D. Kallal & Jose A. Scheinkman & Andrei Shleifer, 1991. "Growth in Cities," NBER Working Papers 3787, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
      • Glaeser, Edward Ludwig & Kallal, Hedi D. & Scheinkman, Jose A. & Shleifer, Andrei, 1992. "Growth in Cities," Scholarly Articles 3451309, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    8. Giuseppe Nicoletti & Stefano Scarpetta, 2003. "Regulation, productivity and growth: OECD evidence," Economic Policy, CEPR;CES;MSH, vol. 18(36), pages 9-72, April.
    9. Bart van Ark & Robert Inklaar & Robert H. McGuckin, 2002. "'Changing Gear' - Productivity, ICT and Services Industries: Europe and the United States," Economics Program Working Papers 02-02, The Conference Board, Economics Program.
    10. Lourens Broersma & Jan Oosterhaven, 2005. "Regional Labour Productivity in The Netherlands - Diversification and Agglomeration Economies," ERSA conference papers ersa05p31, European Regional Science Association.
    11. repec:dgr:rugurs:2003305 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Dale W. Jorgenson & Kevin J. Stiroh, 2000. "Raising the Speed Limit: U.S. Economic Growth in the Information Age," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 31(1), pages 125-236.
    13. Erik Brynjolfsson & Lorin M. Hitt, 2000. "Beyond Computation: Information Technology, Organizational Transformation and Business Performance," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 23-48, Fall.
    14. 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.
    15. Charles R. Hulten, 2001. "Total Factor Productivity: A Short Biography," NBER Chapters,in: New Developments in Productivity Analysis, pages 1-54 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Lourens Broersma & Jouke Van Dijk, 2005. "Regional Differences In Labour Productivity In The Netherlands," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 96(3), pages 334-343, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa05p62. 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: (Gunther Maier). 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.

    If CitEc recognized a 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.

    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.