Despite signs that productivity has recently begun to follow a steeper path, some analysts are skeptical. Episodes of faster productivity growth in the past have often reflected cyclical influences rather than fundamental trend shifts. And, the conventional productivity measure, which is based on fixed-weighted productivity data, has recently shown an upward bias.> To address these concerns, Filardo reexamines the conventional, fixed-weighted productivity measure and also uses a new chain- weighted measure to assess productivity growth. He concludes that the productivity trend has not steepened in the 1990s."> Despite signs that productivity has recently begun to follow a steeper path, some analysts are skeptical. Episodes of faster productivity growth in the past have often reflected cyclical influences rather than fundamental trend shifts. And, the conventional productivity measure, which is based on fixed-weighted productivity data, has recently shown an upward bias.> To address these concerns, Filardo reexamines the conventional, fixed-weighted productivity measure and also uses a new chain- weighted measure to assess productivity growth. He concludes that the productivity trend has not steepened in the 1990s.">
[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/fip/fedker/y1995iqivp41-59nv.80no.4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Has the productivity trend steepened in the 1990s?

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew J. Filardo
Abstract
In the 1990s, conventional measures of productivity growth, or the growth in output per worker, have indicated a dramatic rise. If these measures are correct, the economic benefits are clear. In the short run, sustained, faster productivity growth would enable the economy to expand more rapidly without intensifying inflationary pressures. In the long run, sustained, faster productivity growth would boost real incomes and improve the standard of living.> Despite signs that productivity has recently begun to follow a steeper path, some analysts are skeptical. Episodes of faster productivity growth in the past have often reflected cyclical influences rather than fundamental trend shifts. And, the conventional productivity measure, which is based on fixed-weighted productivity data, has recently shown an upward bias.> To address these concerns, Filardo reexamines the conventional, fixed-weighted productivity measure and also uses a new chain- weighted measure to assess productivity growth. He concludes that the productivity trend has not steepened in the 1990s.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew J. Filardo, 1995. "Has the productivity trend steepened in the 1990s?," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, vol. 80(Q IV), pages 41-59.
    • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedker:y:1995:i:qiv:p:41-59:n:v.80no.4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.kansascityfed.org/documents/810/1995-Has%20the%20Productivity%20Trend%20Steepened%20in%20the%201990s%3F.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martin Neil Baily & Robert J. Gordon, 1988. "The Productivity Slowdown, Measurement Issues, and the Explosion of Computer Power," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 19(2), pages 347-432.
    2. Catherine J. Morrison, 2000. "Assessing The Productivity Of Information Technology Equipment In U.S. Manufacturing Industries," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 79(3), pages 471-481, August.
    3. Donald Siegel & Zvi Griliches, 1992. "Purchased Services, Outsourcing, Computers, and Productivity in Manufacturing," NBER Chapters, in: Output Measurement in the Service Sectors, pages 429-460, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Alan J. Auerbach & Kevin A. Hassett & Stephen D. Oliner, 1994. "Reassessing the Social Returns to Equipment Investment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 109(3), pages 789-802.
    5. Kraemer, Kenneth L. & Dedrick, Jason, 1994. "Payoffs from investment in information technology: Lessons from the Asia-Pacific region," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 22(12), pages 1921-1931, December.
    6. Murray Weidenbaum, 1995. "A New Social Contract for the American Workplace," Challenge, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(1), pages 51-55, January.
    7. Stephen D. Oliner & Daniel E. Sichel, 1994. "Computers and Output Growth Revisited: How Big Is the Puzzle?," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 25(2), pages 273-334.
    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. van Norden, Simon, 2011. "Current trends in the analysis of Canadian productivity growth," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 5-25, January.
    2. C. Alan Garner, 2000. "An inflation report for 1999," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, vol. 85(Q I), pages 5-20.
    3. Sharon Kozicki, 1997. "The productivity growth slowdown: diverging trends in the manufacturing and service sectors," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, issue Q I, pages 31-46.
    4. Claudio Borio & William English & Andrew Filardo, 2003. "A tale of two perspectives: old or new challenges for monetary policy?," BIS Papers chapters, in: Bank for International Settlements (ed.), Monetary policy in a changing environment, volume 19, pages 1-59, Bank for International Settlements.

    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. Charlie Karlsson & Gunther Maier & Michaela Trippl & Iulia Siedschlag & Gavin Murphy, 2010. "ICT and Regional Economic Dynamics: A Literature Review," JRC Research Reports JRC59920, Joint Research Centre.
    2. Young Lee & Jeong Hun Oh & Hwan-Joo Seo, 2002. "Digital Divide and Growth Gap: A Cumulative Relationship," WIDER Working Paper Series DP2002-88, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    3. Erik Brynjolfsson & Lorin M. Hitt, 2003. "Computing Productivity: Firm-Level Evidence," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(4), pages 793-808, November.
    4. Stephen D. Oliner & Daniel E. Sichel, 1994. "Computers and Output Growth Revisited: How Big Is the Puzzle?," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 25(2), pages 273-334.
    5. Edward N. Wolff, 2002. "Productivity, computerization, and skill change," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, vol. 87(Q3), pages 63-87.
    6. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:15:y:2005:i:18:p:1-11 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Aekapol Chongvilaivan, 2012. "Learning by exporting and high-tech capital deepening in Singapore manufacturing industries, 1974–2006," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(20), pages 2551-2568, July.
    8. Aekapol Chongvilaivan, 2012. "Learning by exporting and high-tech capital deepening in Singapore manufacturing industries, 1974--2006," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(20), pages 2551-2568, July.
    9. Argandoña, Antonio, 2001. "Nueva economía y el crecimiento económico, La," IESE Research Papers D/437, IESE Business School.
    10. ten Raa, Thijs & Wolff, Edward N., 2000. "Engines of growth in the US economy," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 473-489, December.
    11. Elsadig Ahmed & Rahim Ridzuan, 2013. "The Impact of ICT on East Asian Economic Growth: Panel Estimation Approach," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 4(4), pages 540-555, December.
    12. Frank R. Lichtenberg, 1993. "The Output Contributions of Computer Equipment and Personnel: A Firm- Level Analysis," NBER Working Papers 4540, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Radhakrishnan, Abirami & Zu, Xingxing & Grover, Varun, 2008. "A process-oriented perspective on differential business value creation by information technology: An empirical investigation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 1105-1125, December.
    14. Sang-Yong Tom Lee & Xiao Jia Guo, 2004. "Information and Communications Technology (ICT) and Spillover: A Panel Analysis," Econometric Society 2004 Far Eastern Meetings 722, Econometric Society.
    15. Alexandru-Ioan Stan, 2018. "Computational speed and high-frequency trading profitability: an ecological perspective," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 28(3), pages 381-395, August.
    16. Abdur Chowdhury, 2003. "Information technology and productivity payoff in the banking industry: evidence from the emerging markets," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(6), pages 693-708.
    17. Ky‐hyang Yuhn & Seung R. Park, 2010. "Information Technology, Organizational Transformation and Productivity Growth: An Examination of the Brynjolfsson–Hitt Proposition," Asian Economic Journal, East Asian Economic Association, vol. 24(1), pages 87-108, March.
    18. Thangavelu, Shandre M. & Chongvilaivan, Aekapol, 2013. "Financial Health and Firm Productivity: Firm-level Evidence from Viet Nam," ADBI Working Papers 434, Asian Development Bank Institute.
    19. Huang, Jiashun & Li, Weiping & Guo, Lijia & Hall, Jim W., 2022. "Information and communications technology infrastructure and firm growth: An empirical study of China's cities," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(3).
    20. Kaushalesh Lal, 2007. "New Technologies and Indian SMEs," The IUP Journal of Applied Economics, IUP Publications, vol. 0(1), pages 20-41, January.
    21. Sandra E. Black & Lisa M. Lynch, 2004. "What's driving the new economy?: the benefits of workplace innovation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(493), pages 97-116, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    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:fip:fedker:y:1995:i:qiv:p:41-59:n:v.80no.4. 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: Zach Kastens (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/frbkcus.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.