DOCSLIB.ORG

Capacity Utilization: Concept, Measurement, and Recent Estimates

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Capacity Utilization: Concept, Measurement, and Recent Estimates LAWRENCE R. KLEIN University of Pennsylvania assisted by VIRGINIA LONG WhartonEconometric Forecasting Associates Capacity Utilization: Concept, Measuremnent, Iand Recent Estimates ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS in the past fifteen years, my colleagues and I have tried to explain disparities among alternative measures of capacity utiliza- tion and to justify our own approach to the measurementproblem.1 George Perry, in his contribution to this issue of Brookings Papers, has indicated many of the important issues, and I would like to amplify his points or restate them from another viewpoint in the interests of clarification. Briefly, the Federal Reserve index estimates that as of mid-October 1973, a fair amount of spare capacity existed in the American economy. The esti- mated operating rate was only 83.4 percent for 1973:3. By contrast, the Wharton index for manufacturing was as high as 96.7 in the same period, and was rising faster than the Federal Reserve index. The McGraw-Hill index was at an intermediate level of 86.5 percent in September. Similar divergences among the indexes had been apparent for several months. These messages are so different that they suggest the need for a close look into the whole subject. For some years the Wharton and Federal Reserve indexes of utilization followed similar paths. They began to diverge in 1965, when the Wharton index rose sharply, as if signaling the onset of the 1. LawrenceR. Klein and Robert Summers,The WhartonIndex of CapacityUtiliza- tion(University of Pennsylvania,Wharton School of Financeand Commerce,Economics ResearchUnit, 1966). 743 744 Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 3:1973 stronginflationary pressures that accompaniedthe VietnamWar.2 Perry's Table3 bringsout sharplythis breakin the relationship.For the two sub- periods1954-65 and 1966-72the seriesall havelarge pair-wise correlations, but the Whartonindex correlatespoorly with the others for the whole period 1954-72. After 1965, the short-runmovements in the Wharton seriesare like those in the others,but its level is much higherin termsof a utilizationrate. I feel that the Whartonindex gave the correctsignals on inflationin 1965 and again at the beginningof 1973. The Concept Full capacityhas been variouslydefined as a minimumpoint on a cost function,a full input point on an aggregateproduction function, and a bottleneckpoint in a generalequilibrium system. Full capacityshould be definedas an attainablelevel of outputthat can be reachedunder normal inputconditions-without lengthening accepted working weeks, and allow- ing for usual vacationsand for normalmaintenance. Preoccupation with measuresfor individualindustries, considered separately from others at the same time, tends to overstatecapacity for the system as a whole. The standardWharton measure of trendlines throughpeaks of individualpro- ductionseries provides a systemof attainablepoints because many or most industriespeak approximatelytogether. The Whartonapproach satisfies the conditionof feasibilityunder normal conditions; it runsthe risk, how- ever,of callinga local maximumpoint one of full capacitywhen it may be only a partialrecovery point. This is the problemof the so-called"weak peak." I believethat 1959was the last time that the economypeaked out at a local maximumwith less than full recovery. Some adjustmentfor the Whartonindex around 1959 became necessary. Preston and I estimatedin- dustryproduction functions and insertedthe full employmentlabor force andcapital stockfor each industry. The valueof productioncomputed from theseinputs at full use yieldedestimates of capacityoutput that could then be used to adjustweak peaksupward.3 2. See WhartonQuarterly, Vol. 6 (Winter 1971), p. 16. 3. L. R. Klein and R. S. Preston, "Some New Results in the Measurementof Ca- pacityUtilization," American Economic Review, Vol. 57 (March 1967), pp. 34-58. Lawrence R. Klein and Virginia Long 745 By distributingthe available(full employment)labor force over indus- tries as it would be, historically,at full employmentpoints, we implicitly take accountof the feasibility,in a generalequilibrium sense, of attaining the outputlevel that we designateas full capacity.This approach is different from one relyingon a purelymacroeconomic production function or from one that estimatesoutput at full capacityin each sectorwithout taking ac- count of relationshipsto other sectors.Subsequent to 1959, the economy consistentlypeaked out at full capacitypoints. The overshootingof inter- mediate peaks like those in 1959 when the trend lines are established throughpeaks has providedus fairly reliabletrends on capacitythat we now use in the Whartonindex. As the economyapproaches a turn,however, before the maximumpoint has been fullyreached-as at the end of 1973-the capacityvalues in a few cases keep exceedingthose in the previousquarter so that the capacity trendsmust be movedslightly upward. This is a fault of our method,but I thinkthat the resultingupward bias in capacityutilization is less than2 full percentagepoints in presentcircumstances. Accordingto presentforecasts, it is likely that the economy will slow down in coming months; thereforesubsequent quarters should not push economicperformance in separateindustries on to new, higher,capacity points that would lead us to reviseupward our capacitytrend lines. The figuresin Perry'sTable 9 areinteresting to me in thatthey indicatea muchsmaller upward bias for the Whartonindex over the FederalReserve or McGraw-Hillmeasures than would be suggestedby the comparisonof the usual aggregateindexes. The FederalReserve estimates in Table 9 for major materialsindustries are more firmlybased on direct information fromengineering and tradesources. They tend to be no morethan about5 points below the correspondingWharton indexes. Generallyspeaking, I like productionfunction estimates of capacityout- put, but for quicknessof estimationand simplicityof concept,I preferto workon a largescale with our presentmethod of trendlines through peaks, usingproduction function estimates only for adjustmentand extrapolation.4 4. Interestingmeasures of productionfunctions are containedin a researchpaper by Robert M. Coen and Bert G. Hickman, "AggregateUtilization Measuresof Economic Performance,"Research Memorandum 140 (StanfordUniversity, Center for Researchin Economic Growth, February1973; processed). 746 Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 3:1973 Yet another approachdraws on linear programmingcalculations. In studies of chemicalproduction and petroleumrefining, Malenbaum and Griffinmeasure capacity as the "bottleneck"point in expansionalong a given ray correspondingto a fixed productmix.5 When one producthits such a bottleneck,all othersdependent on it for intermediateinput are re- strictedat less thanfull capacityutilization. This provides a maximumout- put point while preservinga given productmix. The Malenbaumand Griffinestimates for petroleumand chemicalswere checkedagainst the Whartonestimates of utilizationfor the same indus- tries. In general,little agreementwas found betweenthe resultsfrom the engineering-typeestimates and the standardWharton procedures, espe- cially for short-runmovements. But in most cases, the Whartonestimates of utilizationfor petroleumrefining are higherby about 4-5 percentage pointsthan those based on the linearprogramming model. For the chemical industry,the resultsare closer,but in a few isolatedyears the discrepancy exceeds5 percentagepoints. Systematicanalysis and coverage of all major sectors by production functionestimation, input-output methods, and linearprogramming calcu- lations promisethe greatestreturn in precisionof measurement,but that combinedapproach seems to be a long way off, exceptfor intensive research in separateindustries. In this connection,I disagreewith Perry'sview that limitationson pro- ductionresulting from shortages of intermediateproducts (like today'san- ticipatedshortages of fuel)should not affectthe conceptof capacity.Capac- ity is a generalequilibrium concept, which should be alteredin the light of bottleneckswhose effectscan be tracedthrough an input-outputanalysis. That is the whole point in usingcapacity utilization measures as signalsof inflationarypressure, and accounts for my view that other measures stronglyoverstate the amount of spare capacityavailable by not taking accountof interrelationshipsamong industries.6 5. Helen Malenbaum,"Capacity Balance in the Chemical Industry,"in Lawrence R. Klein (ed.), Essays in IndustrialEconometrics, Vol. 2 (University of Pennsylvania, Economics Research Unit, 1969); James Griffin, CapacityMeasurement in Petroleum Refining:A Process Analysis Approachto the Joint Product Case (Heath, 1971). 6. A techniquefor estimatingcapacity utilizationrates in an input-outputmodel is given in L. R. Klein, "Some Theoretical Issues in the Measurementof Capacity," Econometrica,Vol. 28 (April 1960), especiallypp. 280-86. Lawrence R. Klein and Virginia Long 747 CapacityUtilization as an ExplanatoryVariable Indirectuse of capacitymeasures is importantin the constructionof econometricmodels and servesas a validationtest for the seriesactually beingconsidered. The indirectuses arein equationsfor (a) priceformation; (b) capitalformation; (c) trade.Capacity utilization is one of the most stra- tegicvariables in the Whartonmodel, and showsup in severalplaces. In the basic equationfor price formation-the manufacturingdeflator-a non- lineartransformation of capacityis one of the most significantvariables: loglg1- I CPMF' where CPMF is capacityutilization in manufacturingconstrained to
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Study of Paul A. Samuelson's Economics
    Copyright is owned by the Author of the thesis. Permission is given for a copy to be downloaded by an individual for the purpose of research and private study only. The thesis may not be reproduced elsewhere without the permission of the Author. A Study of Paul A. Samuelson's Econol11ics: Making Economics Accessible to Students A thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Economics at Massey University Palmerston North, New Zealand. Leanne Marie Smith July 2000 Abstract Paul A. Samuelson is the founder of the modem introductory economics textbook. His textbook Economics has become a classic, and the yardstick of introductory economics textbooks. What is said to distinguish economics from the other social sciences is the development of a textbook tradition. The textbook presents the fundamental paradigms of the discipline, these gradually evolve over time as puzzles emerge, and solutions are found or suggested. The textbook is central to the dissemination of the principles of a discipline. Economics has, and does contribute to the education of students, and advances economic literacy and understanding in society. It provided a common economic language for students. Systematic analysis and research into introductory textbooks is relatively recent. The contribution that textbooks play in portraying a discipline and its evolution has been undervalued and under-researched. Specifically, applying bibliographical and textual analysis to textbook writing in economics, examining a single introductory economics textbook and its successive editions through time is new. When it is considered that an economics textbook is more than a disseminator of information, but a physical object with specific content, presented in a particular way, it changes the way a researcher looks at that textbook.
    [Show full text]
  • Capacity Utilization, Inflation and Monetary Policy
    Capacity Utilization, Inflation and Monetary Policy: Classicals, post-Keynesians and the New Keynesian Consensus Peter Kriesler and Marc Lavoie1 Abstract The paper looks at the adjustment process towards long run equilibrium within Marxian models, defined in terms of normal rates of capacity utilization. The model is reduced to three essential equations: an IS equation, a Phillips curve equation and an central bank reaction function. It is shown that long run convergence depends on the specific inflation (Phillips curve) equation, and on the central bank setting a zero inflationary target. When these conditions are relaxed, the results are shown to accord more closely with post-Keynesian results. The Marxian model is then contrasted with New Consensus models, which only varies in its inflation/Phillips curve equation. Post-Keynesian criticisms of both the IS and the Phillips curve equation are considered, and suggestions for a post-Keynesian alternative are made. Keywords: monetary policy, central bank, inflation, capacity utilization, post-Keynesian, New- Keynesian JEL classification: E12, E40, E52, E58 In an extremely interesting paper, Duménil and Lévy (Duménil and Lévy 1999) explore the adjustment mechanism of an economy towards a long run equilibrium with capacity utilization at normal levels − a fully adjusted position as the Sraffians would call it, or a classical long-term equilibrium as Duménil and Lévy have it. Short run equilibrium within their model is of the Keynes/Kalecki type, with variability in levels of capacity utilization. One distinctive feature of their model is that it is not the forces of competition which push the economy to a fully adjusted position, but rather aspects of the macro economy coupled with the behaviour of the central bank.
    [Show full text]
  • Rolling the DICE: William Nordhaus's Dubious Case for a Carbon
    SUBSCRIBE NOW AND RECEIVE CRISIS AND LEVIATHAN* FREE! “The Independent Review does not accept “The Independent Review is pronouncements of government officials nor the excellent.” conventional wisdom at face value.” —GARY BECKER, Noble Laureate —JOHN R. MACARTHUR, Publisher, Harper’s in Economic Sciences Subscribe to The Independent Review and receive a free book of your choice* such as the 25th Anniversary Edition of Crisis and Leviathan: Critical Episodes in the Growth of American Government, by Founding Editor Robert Higgs. This quarterly journal, guided by co-editors Christopher J. Coyne, and Michael C. Munger, and Robert M. Whaples offers leading-edge insights on today’s most critical issues in economics, healthcare, education, law, history, political science, philosophy, and sociology. Thought-provoking and educational, The Independent Review is blazing the way toward informed debate! Student? Educator? Journalist? Business or civic leader? Engaged citizen? This journal is for YOU! *Order today for more FREE book options Perfect for students or anyone on the go! The Independent Review is available on mobile devices or tablets: iOS devices, Amazon Kindle Fire, or Android through Magzter. INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE, 100 SWAN WAY, OAKLAND, CA 94621 • 800-927-8733 • [email protected] PROMO CODE IRA1703 Rolling the DICE William Nordhaus’s Dubious Case for a Carbon Tax F ROBERT P. M URPHY he 2007 Nobel Peace Prize awarded to Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) underscores the public’s growing aware- T ness of and concern about anthropogenic (man-made) global warming. Many climatologists and other relevant scientists claim that emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) from human activity will lead to increases in the earth’s temperature, which in turn will spell potentially catastrophic hardship for future generations.
    [Show full text]
  • Employment and Capacity Utilization Over the Business Cycle
    2016 n Number 19 ECONOMIC Synopses Employment and Capacity Utilization Over the Business Cycle Ana Maria Santacreu, Economist he fraction of the labor force that is currently Capacity Utilization: Total Industry (left) 100-Civilian Unemployment Rate (right) 98 employed is often interpreted as a measure of the 90 utilization rate of an economy’s labor force. There is 96 T 85 a corresponding concept that tries to measure the utiliza- tion rate of an economy’s capital stock—the capacity utili- 94 80 zation rate.1 The capacity utilization rate is constructed as 100-% 92 the percentage of resources (i.e., labor and capital) used 75 Percent of Capacity by corporations and factories to produce enough finished 90 goods to meet demand. 70 88 The figure plots U.S. capacity utilization at a quarterly 65 frequency from 1967:Q1–2016:Q1. In normal times, facto- 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 ries tend to use around 80 percent of their available pro- fred.stlouisfed.org myf.red/g/6ZXZ ductive capacity (as the capacity utilization average in the NOTE: The gray bars indicate recessions as determined by the National Bureau figure suggests). Because demand fluctuates, factories may of Economic Research. SOURCE: FRED®, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; not want to use 100 percent of their installed capacity to https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=6TA4; August 2016. avoid production bottlenecks so they can meet consumer demand. Thus, they may permit the utilization rate to fluctuate with demand. increases during expansions and decreases during recessions. In principle, capacity utilization and employment should Capacity and employment are affected comove closely, which was the case in the United States by cyclical factors, but employment during the period 1967:Q1–1990:Q1.
    [Show full text]
  • Imbalance Game 2.0: a Tale of Two Productivities
    NEW THINKING Imbalance Game 2.0: A Tale of Two Productivities Michael Craig, CFA Vice President & Director Haining Zha, CFA Vice President September 2017 Almost nine years after the financial crisis, the global economy remains mired in low growth. Low productivity growth is certainly a key contributing factor, but our research shows that current productivity measures don’t tell the whole story. In this article, we propose a fundamental change to how people should examine productivity: we believe the supply and demand sides should be viewed separately to obtain more robust insights. Taking this approach allows us to differentiate supply-side progress from demand-side malaise and shows that the economy may be more promising than commonly thought. In addition, it highlights large supply-side divergences within and across different sectors of the economy, which are not reflected in the aggregate productivity measure – potentially leading to a distorted economic picture. Viewing productivity through this new lens, we believe that: • Nominal economic growth will remain low • Inflation will remain subdued • Interest rates will stay lower for longer • Technology-driven progress and persistent supply-side divergence will create investment risks and opportunities in equity markets In the investment world, economic growth is a big deal. We believe investment returns across asset classes can ultimately be traced back to one source: economic growth. Occasionally, asset prices can deviate from fundamentals, but over the long term, the relationship between returns and growth is very strong. That’s why it is critical to have a better understanding of the low growth phenomenon and key contributing factors, such as productivity.
    [Show full text]
  • Paul Samuelson and Global Public Goods
    Paul Samuelson and Global Public Goods William D. Nordhaus Yale University1 May 5, 2005 A commemorative essay for Paul Samuelson ________________________________________________________ It is both easy and hard to write an essay commemorating Paul Samuelson’s contributions to economics. Easy, because he has created so much of modern economics that you could write on virtually anything – stabilization policy, economic growth, international trade, welfare economics, or just about any topic that caught your fancy. Hard, because, like Buridan’s ass, you could easily procrastinate forever in deciding which of the many treasures of his ideas to draw from. In the end, I chose to draw from Paul’s writings on public goods. In two and one-half pages, he reshaped the way economists and political philosophers think about the distinction between private goods and public goods.2 Once those concepts are learned, we can never again forget why the allocational questions for bread are fundamentally different from those of lighthouses. I will focus on an important example of this topic, and one that poses particularly thorny practical 1 The author is Sterling Professor of Economics at Yale University. 2 Paul Samuelson, “The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 36, No. 4, Nov. 1954, pp. 387-389. - 1 - issues, which is the case of global public goods. A brief intellectual history of the concepts is appended. What great blessings or scourges have befallen humanity? Consider issues as disparate as greenhouse warming and ozone depletion, the Internet and William Shakespeare, terrorism and money laundering, the discovery of antibiotics and nuclear proliferation.
    [Show full text]
  • Notes on the Accumulation and Utilization of Capital: Some Theoretical Issues
    Working Paper No. 952 Notes on the Accumulation and Utilization of Capital: Some Theoretical Issues by Michalis Nikiforos* Levy Economics Institute of Bard College April 2020 * For useful comments, the author would like to thank participants at the 45th annual Eastern Economic Association conference in New York and those at the 23rd Forum for Microeconomics and Macroeconomics conference in Berlin. The usual disclaimer applies The Levy Economics Institute Working Paper Collection presents research in progress by Levy Institute scholars and conference participants. The purpose of the series is to disseminate ideas to and elicit comments from academics and professionals. Levy Economics Institute of Bard College, founded in 1986, is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, independently funded research organization devoted to public service. Through scholarship and economic research it generates viable, effective public policy responses to important economic problems that profoundly affect the quality of life in the United States and abroad. Levy Economics Institute P.O. Box 5000 Annandale-on-Hudson, NY 12504-5000 http://www.levyinstitute.org Copyright © Levy Economics Institute 2020 All rights reserved ISSN 1547-366X ABSTRACT This paper discusses some issues related to the triangle between capital accumulation, distribution, and capacity utilization. First, it explains why utilization is a crucial variable for the various theories of growth and distribution—more precisely, with regards to their ability to combine an autonomous role for demand (along Keynesian lines) and an institutionally determined distribution (along classical lines). Second, it responds to some recent criticism by Girardi and Pariboni (2019). I explain that their interpretation of the model in Nikiforos (2013) is misguided, and that the results of the model can be extended to the case of a monopolist.
    [Show full text]
  • The Great Depression As a Historical Problem
    Upjohn Institute Press The Great Depression as a Historical Problem Michael A. Bernstein University of California, San Diego Chapter 3 (pp. 63-94) in: The Economics of the Great Depression Mark Wheeler, ed. Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, 1998 DOI: 10.17848/9780585322049.ch3 Copyright ©1998. W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. All rights reserved. 3 The Great Depression as a Historical Problem Michael A. Bernstein University of California, San Diego It is now over a half-century since the Great Depression of the 1930s, the most severe and protracted economic crisis in American his tory. To this day, there exists no general agreement about its causes, although there tends to be a consensus about its consequences. Those who at the time argued that the Depression was symptomatic of a pro found weakness in the mechanisms of capitalism were only briefly heard. After World War II, their views appeared hysterical and exag gerated, as the industrialized nations (the United States most prominent among them) sustained dramatic rates of growth and as the economics profession became increasingly preoccupied with the development of Keynesian theory and the management of the mixed economy. As a consequence, the economic slump of the inter-war period came to be viewed as a policy problem rather than as an outgrowth of fundamental tendencies in capitalist development. Within that new context, a debate persisted for a few years, but it too eventually subsided. The presump tion was that the Great Depression could never be repeated owing to the increasing sophistication of economic analysis and policy formula tion.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Models and Probabilities in the Monetary Policy Process
    1017-01 BPEA/Sims 12/30/02 14:48 Page 1 CHRISTOPHER A. SIMS Princeton University The Role of Models and Probabilities in the Monetary Policy Process This is a paper on the way data relate to decisionmaking in central banks. One component of the paper is based on a series of interviews with staff members and a few policy committee members of four central banks: the Swedish Riksbank, the European Central Bank (ECB), the Bank of England, and the U.S. Federal Reserve. These interviews focused on the policy process and sought to determine how forecasts were made, how uncertainty was characterized and handled, and what role formal economic models played in the process at each central bank. In each of the four central banks, “subjective” forecasting, based on data analysis by sectoral “experts,” plays an important role. At the Federal Reserve, a seventeen-year record of model-based forecasts can be com- pared with a longer record of subjective forecasts, and a second compo- nent of this paper is an analysis of these records. Two of the central banks—the Riksbank and the Bank of England— have explicit inflation-targeting policies that require them to set quantita- tive targets for inflation and to publish, several times a year, their forecasts of inflation. A third component of the paper discusses the effects of such a policy regime on the policy process and on the role of models within it. The large models in use in central banks today grew out of a first generation of large models that were thought to be founded on the statisti- cal theory of simultaneous-equations models.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Business Cycles 40 Years After Nordhaus Eric Dubois
    Political Business Cycles 40 Years after Nordhaus Eric Dubois To cite this version: Eric Dubois. Political Business Cycles 40 Years after Nordhaus. Public Choice, Springer Verlag, 2016, 166 (1-2), pp.235-259. 10.1007/s11127-016-0313-z. hal-01291401 HAL Id: hal-01291401 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01291401 Submitted on 21 Mar 2016 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Political Business Cycles 40 Years after Nordhaus Eric Dubois1 Abstract: The aim of this article is to survey the huge literature that has emerged in the last four decades following Nordhaus’s (1975) publication on political business cycles (PBCs). I first propose some developments in history of thought to examine the context in which this ground-breaking contribution saw the light of the day. I also present a simplified version of Nordhaus’s model to highlight his key results. I detail some early critiques of this model and the fields of investigations to which they gave birth. I then focus on the institutional context and examine its influence on political business cycles, the actual research agenda. Finally, I derive some paths for future research.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Business Cycle and Economic Instability - Literature Review
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Tiganas, Claudiu-Gabriel; Peptine, Claudiu Article Political Business Cycle and Economic Instability - Literature Review CES Working Papers Provided in Cooperation with: Centre for European Studies, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University Suggested Citation: Tiganas, Claudiu-Gabriel; Peptine, Claudiu (2012) : Political Business Cycle and Economic Instability - Literature Review, CES Working Papers, ISSN 2067-7693, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iasi, Centre for European Studies, Iasi, Vol. 4, Iss. 4, pp. 853-865 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/198221 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend
    [Show full text]
  • 1017-04 BPEA/Nordhaus 12/30/02 15:01 Page 211
    1017-04 BPEA/Nordhaus 12/30/02 15:01 Page 211 WILLIAM D. NORDHAUS Yale University Productivity Growth and the New Economy What, another paper on the new economy? When financial markets are raking through the debris of $8 trillion in lost equity value, and “.com” is a reviled four-symbol word, a paper on the impact of the new economy on productivity would seem as welcome as an analysis of the role of whales in the lighting revolution. In fact, the new economy (or, more precisely, information technolo- gies) continues to raise important puzzles about productivity growth. Variations in productivity growth have proved to be one of the most durable puzzles in macroeconomics. After a period of rapid growth fol- lowing World War II, productivity stagnated in the early 1970s. There was no shortage of explanations offered, including rising energy prices, high and unpredictable inflation, rising tax rates, growing government, burdensome environmental and health regulation, declining research and development, deteriorating labor skills, depleted possibilities for inven- tion, and societal laziness.1 Yet these explanations seemed increasingly inadequate as inflation fell, tax rates were cut, regulatory burdens stabi- lized, government’s share of output fell, research and development and patents granted grew sharply, real energy prices fell back to pre-1973 lev- els, and a burst of invention in the new economy and other sectors fueled an investment boom in the 1990s. The productivity slowdown puzzle of the 1980s evolved into the Solow paradox of the early 1990s: computers were everywhere except in the The author is grateful for comments from Ray Fair, Robert Yuskavage, and members of the Brookings Panel.
    [Show full text]