IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nzt/nztans/an22-05.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

New Zealand's Productivity Performance: Taking a Broader View

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Since the early-2000s, New Zealand’s per capita real income has grown faster than its per capita real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) – reflecting a rising terms of trade. This increasing and persistent difference has important implications for the interpretation of New Zealand’s economic performance: Using historical GDP is likely to understate the income and wellbeing benefits of the changes in economic structure since the early 1990s. The income gain arising from a higher terms of trade is greater when policy settings enable resources to move into higher value production. The income gain provides more choices, both for consumption and investment. Nonetheless, labour productivity growth has been the main source of growth in both per capita income and output measures. New Zealand’s measurement of average annual hours worked tends to produce systemically higher results than other OECD countries, many of which utilise a relatively conservative method. As a result, comparing New Zealand internationally can result in overstated differences in hours worked, and understate New Zealand’s labour productivity compared to other countries. But neither this effect nor the terms of trade effect restore New Zealand’s past productivity or income relativities against high-income OECD comparators. New Zealand is increasingly a service economy. Using trade-in-value added, as opposed to gross exports, indicates the increasing role of services embodied in the exports of primary and manufacturing industries. This finding reinforces the importance of policies that raise the productivity of services – both for the direct effect on the sector but also the indirect effects on export competitiveness. This note indicates areas of possible further research and gaps in the evidence base, including the drivers of changes in the terms of trade and the role of intangible capital in the New Zealand economy. The Treasury is planning further analysis examining the links between productivity, income, and the wellbeing domains of the Living Standards Framework (LSF).

Suggested Citation

  • John Janssen & Margaret Galt & Giles Bollinger, 2022. "New Zealand's Productivity Performance: Taking a Broader View," Treasury Analytical Notes Series an22/05, New Zealand Treasury.
  • Handle: RePEc:nzt:nztans:an22/05
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.treasury.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2022-09/an22-05.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Conway, 2018. "Can the Kiwi Fly? Achieving Productivity Lift-off in New Zealand," International Productivity Monitor, Centre for the Study of Living Standards, vol. 34, pages 40-63, Spring.
    2. Ulrich Kohli, 2003. "Terms of trade, real GDP, and real value added: A new look at New Zealand's growth performance," New Zealand Economic Papers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 41-66.
    3. Chad Syverson, 2011. "What Determines Productivity?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 49(2), pages 326-365, June.
    4. Kohli, Ulrich, 2004. "Real GDP, real domestic income, and terms-of-trade changes," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 83-106, January.
    5. Paul Conway, 2016. "Achieving New Zealand's productivity potential," Working Papers 2016/01, New Zealand Productivity Commission.
    6. Nathan Chappell & Adam Jaffe, 2018. "Intangible Investment and Firm Performance," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 52(4), pages 509-559, June.
    7. Julia Hall & Grant Scobie, 2005. "Capital Shallowness: A Problem for New Zealand?," Treasury Working Paper Series 05/05, New Zealand Treasury.
    8. Ron Crawford & Richard Fabling & Arthur Grimes & Nick Bonner, 2007. "National R&D and Patenting: Is New Zealand an Outlier?," New Zealand Economic Papers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(1), pages 69-90.
    9. Ashley Ward & María Belén Zinni & Pascal Marianna, 2018. "International productivity gaps: Are labour input measures comparable?," OECD Statistics Working Papers 2018/12, OECD Publishing.
    10. Richard Fabling, 2021. "Living on the edge: An anatomy of New Zealand’s most productive firms," Working Papers 21_01, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    11. John Toye & Richard Toye, 2003. "The Origins and Interpretation of the Prebisch-Singer Thesis," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 35(3), pages 437-467, Fall.
    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. Margaret Galt, 2023. "An update to estimates of human capital in New Zealand," Treasury Analytical Papers Series ap23/02, New Zealand Treasury.

    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. Paul Conway, 2016. "Achieving New Zealand's productivity potential," Working Papers 2016/01, New Zealand Productivity Commission.
    2. Wolfhard Kaus & Viktor Slavtchev & Markus Zimmermann, 2024. "Intangible capital and productivity: Firm-level evidence from German manufacturing," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 76(4), pages 970-996.
    3. Philip McCann, 2009. "Economic geography, globalisation and New Zealand's productivity paradox," New Zealand Economic Papers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(3), pages 279-314.
    4. Jagjit S. Chadha & Issam Samiri, 2022. "Macroeconomic Perspectives on Productivity," Working Papers 030, The Productivity Institute.
    5. Richard Fabling, 2021. "Living on the edge: An anatomy of New Zealand’s most productive firms," Working Papers 21_01, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    6. Roth, Felix, 2019. "Intangible Capital and Labour Productivity Growth: A Review of the Literature," Hamburg Discussion Papers in International Economics 4, University of Hamburg, Department of Economics.
    7. Mattia Di Ubaldo & Iulia Siedschlag, 2021. "Investment in Knowledge‐Based Capital and Productivity: Firm‐Level Evidence from a Small Open Economy," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 67(2), pages 363-393, June.
    8. Samuel Verevis & Murat Üngör, 2021. "What has New Zealand gained from The FTA with China?: Two counterfactual analyses†," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 68(1), pages 20-50, February.
    9. Simeon D. Alder, 2016. "In the Wrong Hands: Complementarities, Resource Allocation, and TFP," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 199-241, January.
    10. Joachim Wagner, 2012. "Exports, R&D and productivity: a test of the Bustos-model with German enterprise data," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 32(3), pages 1942-1948.
    11. Francesco Bogliacino & Mario Pianta, 2016. "The Pavitt Taxonomy, revisited: patterns of innovation in manufacturing and services," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 33(2), pages 153-180, August.
    12. Becker, Sascha & Hvide, Hans V, 2013. "Do entrepreneurs matter?," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 109, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    13. Bonatti, Alessandro & Hörner, Johannes, 2017. "Learning to disagree in a game of experimentation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 234-269.
    14. Kim, Hyungtai & Ahn, Sanghoon & Ulfarsson, Gudmundur F., 2021. "Impacts of transportation and industrial complexes on establishment-level productivity growth in Korea," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 89-97.
    15. Balázs Égert, 2016. "Regulation, Institutions, and Productivity: New Macroeconomic Evidence from OECD Countries," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(5), pages 109-113, May.
    16. MORIKAWA Masayuki, 2015. "Service Trade and Productivity: Firm-level evidence from Japan," Discussion papers 15030, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    17. Löschel, Andreas & Pothen, Frank & Schymura, Michael, 2015. "Peeling the onion: Analyzing aggregate, national and sectoral energy intensity in the European Union," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(S1), pages 63-75.
    18. Amitabh Chandra & Amy Finkelstein & Adam Sacarny & Chad Syverson, 2016. "Health Care Exceptionalism? Performance and Allocation in the US Health Care Sector," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(8), pages 2110-2144, August.
    19. Peter Grajzl & Stjepan Srhoj & Jaka Cepec & Barbara Mörec, 2024. "A by-product of big government: the attenuating role of public procurement for the effectiveness of grants-based entrepreneurship policy," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 62(3), pages 895-916, March.
    20. Rosario Crinò & Gino Gancia & Alessandra Bonfiglioli, 2018. "Firms and Economic Performance: A View from Trade," Working Papers 1034, Barcelona School of Economics.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • E01 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General - - - Measurement and Data on National Income and Product Accounts and Wealth; Environmental Accounts
    • E24 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment - - - Employment; Unemployment; Wages; Intergenerational Income Distribution; Aggregate Human Capital; Aggregate Labor Productivity
    • O4 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity

    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:nzt:nztans:an22/05. 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: CSS I&T Web & Publishing, The Treasury (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tregvnz.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.