IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/ipewps/319063.html

Productivity growth and class struggle in a growth regime framework: A proposal for a varieties of productivity regimes approach applied to Germany and the US from 1991 to 2022

Author

Listed:
  • Blees, Philip

Abstract

Scrutinizing post-Keynesian theory of endogenous technical progress and Régulation Theory, this paper examines productivity growth and its variation within capitalist economies. The aim is to identify how institutions steer productivity growth. Based on the vast literature demonstrating that institutions not only have a direct impact on the innovative environment but also affect productivity growth by changing distribution and demand, an analytical framework that distinguishes between these direct and indirect effects is derived. Applying this method to Germany and the US from 1991 to 2022, we find that Germany was characterized by a laborled productivity regime, while the US exhibited a state-led productivity regime. This finding explains the more substantial decline in productivity growth in Germany - which was due to changes in the wage-labor nexus -, as compared to the US, where public investment stabilized productivity growth.

Suggested Citation

  • Blees, Philip, 2025. "Productivity growth and class struggle in a growth regime framework: A proposal for a varieties of productivity regimes approach applied to Germany and the US from 1991 to 2022," IPE Working Papers 254/2025, Berlin School of Economics and Law, Institute for International Political Economy (IPE).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ipewps:319063
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/319063/1/192732064X.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Juillard, Michel & Boyer, Robert, 1992. "New endogeneous growth theory versus a productivity regime (the)," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Couverture Orange) 9210, CEPREMAP.
    2. Alfred Kleinknecht & Flore N. van Schaik & Haibo Zhou, 2014. "Is flexible labour good for innovation? Evidence from firm-level data," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 38(5), pages 1207-1219.
    3. Eric Kemp-Benedict, 2022. "A classical-evolutionary model of technological change," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 1303-1343, September.
    4. Mariana Mazzucato, 2018. "Mission-oriented innovation policies: challenges and opportunities," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(5), pages 803-815.
    5. Pascal Petit, 1999. "Structural Forms and Growth Regimes of the Post-Fordist Era," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(2), pages 220-243.
    6. Gustavo Grullon & Yelena Larkin & Roni Michaely, 2019. "Are US Industries Becoming More Concentrated?," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 23(4), pages 697-743.
    7. Robert M. Solow, 1956. "A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 70(1), pages 65-94.
    8. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    9. Chad Syverson, 2017. "Challenges to Mismeasurement Explanations for the US Productivity Slowdown," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(2), pages 165-186, Spring.
    10. Michalis Nikiforos, 2021. "Notes on the accumulation and utilization of capital: Some empirical issues," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(4), pages 679-695, November.
    11. Servaas Storm & C.W.M. Naastepad, 2015. "Crisis and Recovery in the German Economy: The Real Lessons," Working Papers Series 10, Institute for New Economic Thinking.
    12. C. W. M. Naastepad, 2006. "Technology, demand and distribution: a cumulative growth model with an application to the Dutch productivity growth slowdown," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 30(3), pages 403-434, May.
    13. Bhaduri, Amit & Marglin, Stephen, 1990. "Unemployment and the Real Wage: The Economic Basis for Contesting Political Ideologies," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 14(4), pages 375-393, December.
    14. Robert VERGEER & Alfred KLEINKNECHT, 2014. "Do labour market reforms reduce labour productivity growth? A panel data analysis of 20 OECD countries (1960–2004)," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 153(3), pages 365-393, September.
    15. Christine Oughton & Damian Tobin, 2023. "Joan Robinson: early endogenous growth theorist," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 47(5), pages 943-964.
    16. P. J. Verdoorn, 2002. "Factors that Determine the Growth of Labour Productivity," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: John McCombie & Maurizio Pugno & Bruno Soro (ed.), Productivity Growth and Economic Performance, chapter 2, pages 28-36, Palgrave Macmillan.
    17. Storm, Servaas & Naastepad, C. W. M., 2012. "Macroeconomics Beyond the NAIRU," Economics Books, Harvard University Press, number 9780674062276, march.
    18. Ian Goldin & Pantelis Koutroumpis & François Lafond & Julian Winkler, 2024. "Why Is Productivity Slowing Down?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 62(1), pages 196-268, March.
    19. Storm, Servaas & Naastepad, C.W.M., 2015. "Crisis and recovery in the German economy: The real lessons," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 11-24.
    20. Robert Vergeer & Alfred Kleinknecht, 2010. "The impact of labor market deregulation on productivity: a panel data analysis of 19 OECD countries (1960-2004)," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(2), pages 371-408, January.
    21. Nicholas Kaldor, 1961. "Capital Accumulation and Economic Growth," International Economic Association Series, in: D. C. Hague (ed.), The Theory of Capital, chapter 0, pages 177-222, Palgrave Macmillan.
    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. Riccardo Pariboni & Pasquale Tridico, 2020. "Structural change, institutions and the dynamics of labor productivity in Europe," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1275-1300, November.
    2. Roberto Veneziani & Luca Zamparelli & Daniele Tavani & Luca Zamparelli, 2017. "Endogenous Technical Change In Alternative Theories Of Growth And Distribution," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(5), pages 1272-1303, December.
    3. Eckhard Hein, 2017. "Post-Keynesian macroeconomics since the mid 1990s: main developments," European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 14(2), pages 131-172, September.
    4. Thomas Gries, 2020. "A New Theory of Demand-Restricted Growth: The Basic Idea," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 65(1), pages 11-27, March.
    5. Andre Lorentz & Tommaso Ciarli & Maria Savona & Marco Valente, 2019. "Structural Transformations and Cumulative Causation: Towards an Evolutionary Micro-foundation of the Kaldorian Growth Model," Working Papers of BETA 2019-15, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    6. Bassi, Federico & Lang, Dany, 2016. "Investment hysteresis and potential output: A post-Keynesian–Kaleckian agent-based approach," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 52(PA), pages 35-49.
    7. Alessandro Bellocchi & Giuseppe Travaglini & Beatrice Vitali, 2023. "How capital intensity affects technical progress: An empirical analysis for 17 advanced economies," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(3), pages 606-631, July.
    8. Schubert, Torben & Jäger, Angela & Türkeli, Serdar & Visentin, Fabiana, 2020. "Addressing the productivity paradox with big data: A literature review and adaptation of the CDM econometric model," MERIT Working Papers 2020-050, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    9. Eckhard Hein & Artur Tarassow, 2010. "Distribution, aggregate demand and productivity growth: theory and empirical results for six OECD countries based on a post-Kaleckian model," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 34(4), pages 727-754.
    10. Vinicius Curti Cícero & Daniele Tavani, 2024. "Institutional changes, effective demand and inequality: a structuralist model of secular stagnation," Working Papers PKWP2410, Post Keynesian Economics Society (PKES).
    11. Gries, Thomas, 2018. "A New Theory of Demand-Restricted Growth," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181515, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    12. Eric Kemp-Benedict, 2024. "Cost share-induced technological change: An analytical classical-evolutionary model," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 515-567, July.
    13. Baccaro, Lucio & Hadziabdic, Sinisa, 2022. "Operationalizing growth models," MPIfG Discussion Paper 22/6, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    14. Eckhard Hein, 2012. ""Financialization," distribution, capital accumulation, and productivity growth in a post-Kaleckian model," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(3), pages 475-496.
    15. Olivier Allain, 2006. "La modération salariale : le point de vue des (néo-)kaleckiens," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00196500, HAL.
    16. Li, Defu & Bental, Benjamin, 2023. "What determines the Direction of Technological Progress(2023.11.16)?," MPRA Paper 119211, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 16 Nov 2023.
    17. João Alcobia & Ricardo Barradas, 2022. "Falling Labour Share and the Anaemic Growth in Portugal: a Post-Keynesian Econometric Analysis," Working Papers REM 2022/0247, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, REM, Universidade de Lisboa.
    18. Bertola, Giuseppe, 2000. "Macroeconomics of distribution and growth," Handbook of Income Distribution, in: A.B. Atkinson & F. Bourguignon (ed.), Handbook of Income Distribution, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 9, pages 477-540, Elsevier.
    19. Adriana Di Liberto, 2007. "Convergence and Divergence in Neoclassical Growth Models with Human Capital," Economia politica, Società editrice il Mulino, issue 2, pages 289-322.
    20. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:2:y:2002:i:1:p:1-15 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Nora Albu & Heike Joebges & Rudolf Zwiener, 2018. "Increasing competitiveness at any price?," IMK Working Paper 192-2018, IMK at the Hans Boeckler Foundation, Macroeconomic Policy Institute.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • E11 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General Aggregative Models - - - Marxian; Sraffian; Kaleckian
    • O43 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - Institutions and Growth
    • O47 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - Empirical Studies of Economic Growth; Aggregate Productivity; Cross-Country Output Convergence
    • P52 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Comparative Economic Systems - - - Comparative Studies of Particular Economies

    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:zbw:ipewps:319063. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iphwrde.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.