IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/stc/stcp6e/2008018e.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Capital Intensity in Canada and the United States, 1987 to 2003

Author

Listed:
  • Baldwin, John R. Fisher, Anthony Gu, Wulong Lee, Frank C Robidoux, Benoît

Abstract

Official data from statistical agencies are not always ideal for cross-country comparisons because of differences in data sources and methodology. Analysts who engage in cross-country comparisons need to carefully choose among alternatives and sometimes adapt data especially for their purposes. This paper develops comparable capital stock estimates to examine the relative capital intensity of Canada and the United States. To do so, the paper applies common depreciation rates to Canadian and U.S. assets to come up with comparable capital stock estimates by assets and by industry between the two countries. Based on common depreciation rates, it finds that capital intensity is higher in the Canadian business sector than in the U.S. business sector. This is the net result of quite different ratios at the individual asset level. Canada has as higher intensity of engineering infrastructure assets per dollar of gross domestic product produced. Canada has a lower intensity of information and communications technology (ICT) machinery and equipment (M&E). Non-ICT M&E and building assets intensities are more alike in the two countries. However, these results do not control for the fact that different asset-specific capital intensities between Canada and the United States may be the result of a different industrial structure. When both assets and industry structure are taken into account, the overall picture changes somewhat. Canada's business sector continues to have a higher intensity of engineering infrastructure and about the same intensity of building assets; however, it has a deficit in M&E that goes beyond ICT assets.

Suggested Citation

  • Baldwin, John R. Fisher, Anthony Gu, Wulong Lee, Frank C Robidoux, Benoît, 2008. "Capital Intensity in Canada and the United States, 1987 to 2003," The Canadian Productivity Review 2008018e, Statistics Canada, Economic Analysis Division.
  • Handle: RePEc:stc:stcp6e:2008018e
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/bsolc/olc-cel/olc-cel?catno=15-206-X2008018&lang=eng
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/bsolc/olc-cel/olc-cel?catno=15-206-X2008018&lang=eng
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Ana Rincon-Aznar & Rebecca Riley & Garry Young, 2017. "Academic Review of Asset Lives in the UK," National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) Discussion Papers 474, National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
    2. Wulong Gu & Amélie Lafrance, 2010. "Productivity Growth in Canadian and U.S. Regulated Industries," International Productivity Monitor, Centre for the Study of Living Standards, vol. 19, pages 50-65, Spring.
    3. Miguel Cardoso & Brandon Malloy, 2021. "Impact of the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Trade between Canada and the United States," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 47(4), pages 554-572, December.
    4. Kenneth J. McKenzie & Ergete Ferede, 2017. "Who Pays the Corporate Tax?: Insights from the Literature and Evidence for Canadian Provinces," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 10(6), April.
    5. Wulong Gu, 2012. "Estimating Capital Input for Measuring Business Sector Multifactor Productivity Growth in Canada: Response to Diewert and Yu," International Productivity Monitor, Centre for the Study of Living Standards, vol. 24, pages 49-62, Fall.
    6. Miguel Cardoso & Brandon Malloy, 2024. "Spillovers from government policy during a crisis: Evidence from international trade during COVID‐19 lockdowns," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 1238-1269, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Economic accounts; Productivity accounts;

    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:stc:stcp6e:2008018e. 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: Mark Brown (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/stagvca.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.