Search

This paper revisits the UK productivity puzzle using new data on outputs and inputs and clarifying the role of output mismeasurement, input growth and industry effects. Our data indicate an implied labour productivity gap of 13 percentage points in 2011 relative to the productivity level on pre‐recession trends. We find that: (a) the labour productivity puzzle is a TFP puzzle, since it is not explained by the contributions of labour or capital services; (b) the reallocation of labour between industries deepens rather than explains the puzzle (i.e. there has been a reallocation of hours away from low‐productivity industries and toward high productivity industries); (c) capitalization of R&D does not explain the productivity puzzle; (d) assuming increased scrapping rates since the recession, a 25% (50%) increase in depreciation rates post‐2009 can potentially explain 15% (31%) of the productivity puzzle; (e) industry data show that 35% of the TFP puzzle can be explained by weak TFP growth in the oil & gas and finance sectors; and (f) cyclical effects via factor utilization could potentially explain 17% of the productivity puzzle. Continued weakness in finance would suggest a future lowering of TFP growth to around 0.8% p.a. from a baseline of 0.9% p.a. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Much of the change in individual earnings has occurred at the top. This paper provides new evidence about the earnings distribution in the UK. The evidence is new in that it provides detail about what has happened within the top 10%, covering groups such as the top 1% and the top 0.5%. The aim is to set the recent rise in top earnings in historical perspective, and to make international comparisons. The evidence is new in that it covers the whole of the postwar period, allowing a contrast to be drawn with the 'golden age' of the 1950s. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using industry data for the United States and the United Kingdom, we provide new evidence on the impact of information and communications technology (ICT) capital on real output growth. The traditional industry panel data analysis fails to find a positive contribution. We argue that this is due to heterogeneity across industries, particularly in the time dimension. Pooling the data for the two countries and using a dynamic panel data estimation method yield a positive and significant effect of ICT on output growth. Individual country estimates suggest a strong impact in the United States, while results are less conclusive in the United Kingdom. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Kaldor (1966) asserted that the slow rate of economic growth of the United Kingdom was due mainly to the shortage of labor resulting from "economic maturity". Kaldor (1975), in a subsequent comment on Rowthorn's (1975a) article, abandoned this reasoning and presented the strict Verdoorn law as
(1) p=+q with >0
and his own presentation of Verdoorn's law as
(2) e=+q with 0<<1 and e=q-p
where p is the rate of growth of productivity, q is the rate of growth of output, e is the rate of growth of employment, and ,, and are parameters.
The main purpose of this paper is to argue that both sets of results are subject to simultaneous equations bias and that mis-specification of estimated equations leads to incorrect estimates and wrong conclusions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]