Predicting Medium-Term TFP Growth in the United States: Econometrics vs ‘Techno-Optimism’

Abstract

We analyse TFP growth in the US business sector using a basic unobserved component model where trend growth follows a random walk and the noise is a first order autoregression. This is fitted using a Kalman-filter methodology. We find that trend TFP growth has declined steadily from 1.5 to 1.0 per cent per year over the past 50 years. Nevertheless, recent trends are not a good guide to actual medium-term TFP growth. This exhibits substantial variations and is quite unpredictable. Techno-optimists should not give best to productivity pessimists simply because recent TFP growth has been weak.

Keywords

productivity slowdown secular stagnation TFP growth

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ahmad

, Ribarsky

and Reinsdorf

(2017), ‘Can potential mismeasurement of the digital economy explain the post-crisis slowdown in GDP and productivity growth?’, OECD Statistics Working Paper No. 85.

Antolin-Diaz

, Drechsel

and Petrella

(2017), ‘Tracking the slowdown in long-run GDP growth’, Review of Economics and Statistics, 99, pp. 343–56.

Arntz

, Gregory

and Zierahn

(2016), ‘The risk of automation in OECD countries: a comparative analysis’, OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Paper No. 189.

Bai

and Perron

(1998), ‘Estimating and testing linear models with multiple structural changes’, Econometrica, 66, pp. 47–78.

Bai

and Perron

(2003), ‘Computation and analysis of multiple structural change models’, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 18, pp. 1–22.

Blanchard

, Lorenzoni

and L'Huiller

J.-P.

(2017), ‘Short-run effects of lower productivity growth: a twist on the secular stagnation hypothesis’, NBER Working Paper No. 23160.

Brynjolfsson

and McAfee

(2014), The Second Machine Age, New York: Norton.

Byrne

, Fernald

and Reinsdorf

M.B.

(2016), ‘Does the United States have a productivity slowdown or a measurement problem?’, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity (Spring), pp. 109–57.

Byrne

D.M.

, Oliner

S.D.

and Sichel

D.E.

(2013), ‘Is the information technology revolution over?’, International Productivity Monitor, 25, pp. 20–36.

10.

Congressional Budget Office (2001), CBO's Method for Estimating Potential Output: an Update.

11.

Congressional Budget Office (2017), The Budget and Economic Outlook 2017–2027.

12.

Cowen

(2011), The Great Stagnation, New York: Dutton.

13.

Decker

, Haltiwanger

, Jarmin

R.S.

and Miranda

(2017), ‘Declining dynamism, allocative efficiency and the productivity slowdown’, Federal Reserve Board Finance and Economics Discussion Paper No. 2017–019.

14.

Duval

, Hong

G.H.

and Timmer

(2017), ‘Financial frictions and the great productivity slowdown’, IMF Working Paper No. 17/129.

15.

Fernald

J.G.

(2014), ‘A quarterly, utilization-adjusted series on total factor productivity’, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco Working Paper 2012–19.

16.

Frey

C.B.

and Osborne

M.A.

(2017), ‘The future of employment: how susceptible are jobs to computerisation?’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 114, pp. 254–80.

17.

Gamberoni

, Giordiano

and Lopez-Garcia

(2016), ‘Capital and labour (mis)allocation in the Euro Area: some stylized facts and determinants’, ECB Working Paper No. 1981.

18.

Gordon

R.J.

(2016), The Rise and Fall of American Growth, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

19.

Greenspan

(2000), ‘Technology and the economy’, speech to the Economic Club of New York, 13 January, http://federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/speeches/2000/200001132.htm.

20.

Hansen

A.H.

(1939), ‘Economic progress and declining population growth’, American Economic Review, 29, pp. 1–15.

21.

Havik

, McMorrow

, Orlandi

, Planas

, Raciborski

, Röger

, Rossi

, Thum-Thysen

and Vandermeulen

(2014), ‘The production function methodology for calculating potential growth rates and output gaps’, European Economy Economic Papers No. 535.

22.

Lipsey

R.G.

, Carlaw

K.I.

and Bekar

C.T.

(2005), Economic Transformations: General Purpose Technologies and Economic Growth, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

23.

Ollivaud

, Guillemette

and Turner

(2016), ‘Links between weak investment and the slowdown in productivity and potential output growth across the OECD’, OECD Economics Department Working Paper No. 1304.

24.

Syverson

(2017), ‘Challenges to mismeasurement explanations for the U.S. productivity slowdown’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), pp. 165–86.

25.

Van Ark

(2016), ‘The productivity paradox of the new digital economy’, International Productivity Monitor, 31, pp. 3–18.