IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sls/ipmsls/v26y20133.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multifactor Productivity Growwth Estimation in Canada and the United States: Do Different Methodologies Matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Jiang Li
  • Larry Shute
  • Jianmin Tang

Abstract

National statistics offices in different countries, as well as individual researchers, make a range of different assumptions and use different approaches to estimating multifactor productivity (MFP) growth. As a result, MFP growth estimates can vary for methodological reasons across countries and for a particular country over a given time period. These methodological choices typically reflect a combination of data availability and the objectives of the study. In this article, we use “reasonably” comparable data for output, labour and capital in Canada and the United States to investigate the sensitivity of MPF growth estimates (by industry and for the business sector in the two countries) to three alternative methodological assumptions. We show that MFP growth estimates for both countries and the Canada-U.S. MFP growth gap are fairly robust to the alternative methodologies and assumptions considered.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiang Li & Larry Shute & Jianmin Tang, 2013. "Multifactor Productivity Growwth Estimation in Canada and the United States: Do Different Methodologies Matter?," International Productivity Monitor, Centre for the Study of Living Standards, vol. 26, pages 36-62, Fall.
    • Handle: RePEc:sls:ipmsls:v:26:y:2013:3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.csls.ca/ipm/26/IPM-26-Li-Shute-Tang.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jianmin Tang, 2015. "Employment and Productivity: Exploring the Trade-off," International Productivity Monitor, Centre for the Study of Living Standards, vol. 28, pages 63-80, Spring.

    More about this item

    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:sls:ipmsls:v:26:y:2013:3. 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.

    We have no bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CSLS (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cslssca.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.