Your browser does not support the PubReader view.
Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.
Seoul Journal of Economics
[ Article ]
Seoul Journal of Economics - Vol. 30, No. 3, pp.251-289
ISSN: 1225-0279 (Print)
Print publication date 31 Aug 2017
Received 08 Feb 2017 Revised 03 Jun 2017 Accepted 05 Jun 2017

Investment-Specific and Multi-Factor Productivity in Multi-Sector Open Economies: Data and Analysis

Luca Guerrieri ; Dale W. Henderson ; Jinill Kim
Luca Guerrieri, Federal Reserve Board luca.guerrieri@frb.gov
Dale Henderson, Center for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis dale.henderson@rcn.com
Jinill Kim (corresponding author), Korea University JINILLKIM@korea.ac.kr

JEL Classification: D83, F43, O41

Abstract

In the second half of the 1990s, labor productivity growth rose in the United States and declined in most parts of Europe. This paper documents changes in capital deepening and multi-factor productivity (MFP) growth in information and communication technology (ICT) and non-ICT sectors. We consider MFP growth in the ICT sector as investment-specific productivity (ISP) growth. We perform simulations suggested by the data by adopting a two-country dynamic general equilibrium model with traded and nontraded goods. For ISP, we consider level increases and persistent growth rate increases that are symmetric across countries and allow for costs of adjusting capital-labor ratios that are considerably high in one country because of structural differences. Investment-specific productivity increases generated investment booms unless adjustment costs are excessively high. For MFP, we consider persistent growth rate shocks that are asymmetric. When these MFP shocks affect only traded goods (as commonly assumed), movements in “international” variables are qualitatively similar to those in the data. However, when such shocks also affect nontraded goods (as suggested by the data), movements in some of the variables are not qualitatively similar to those in the data. For the acquisition of plausible results for the growth rate shocks, slow recognition needs to be taken into account.

Keywords:

Technological shocks, Technical change, Dynamic General Equilibrium, Learning, Harrod–Balassa–Samuelson Effect, Nontraded goods

Acknowledgments

The views in this paper are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System or any other person associated with the Federal Reserve System. Jinill Kim acknowledges the financial support from the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2013S1A5A2A03044693). The authors of this paper obtained helpful comments from participants in the conference entitled “Dynamic Macroeconomic Theory” and in seminars at the International Finance Division of the Federal Reserve Board and Georgetown University. They also had useful discussions with Susantu Basu, David Bowman, Andrea DeMichelis, Charles Engel, Christopher Erceg, Christopher Gust, Jon Faust, Jaime Marquez, Daniel Sichel, and Jonathan Wright. The authors also take responsibility for remaining errors in the paper.

References

  • Backus, D., Kehoe, P., and Kydland, F. “Dynamics of the Trade Balance and the Terms of Trade: The J-Curve?” American Economic Review 84 (No. 1 1994a): 84-103.
  • Backus, D., Kehoe, P., and Kydland, F. “Relative Price Movements in Dynamic General Equilibrium Models of International Trade.” In F. van der Ploeg (ed.), The Handbook of International Macroeconomics. Oxford: Blackwell, 1994b.
  • Baxter, M. “International Trade and Business Cycles.” In G. Grossman and K. Rogoff (eds.), Handbook of International Economics, Volume 3, pp. 1801-1864, Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1995. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S1573-4404(05)80015-2]
  • Baxter, M., and Crucini, M. J. “Business Cycles and the Asset Structure of Foreign Trade.” International Economic Review 36 (No. 4 1995): 821-854. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2527261]
  • Bergin, P. R., and Glick, R. Endogenous Tradability and Macroeconomic Implications. No. w9739. National Bureau of Economic Research, 2003. [https://doi.org/10.3386/w9739]
  • Bosworth, B. P., and Triplett, J. E. What’s New about the New Economy? It, Economic Growth, and Productivity. processed, Brookings Institution, 2000.
  • Dornbusch, R., Fischer, S., and Samuelson, P. A. “Comparative Advantage, Trade, and Payments in a Ricardian Model with a Continuum of Goods.” American Economic Review 67 (No. 5 1977): 823-839.
  • Dumagan, J. C. “Comparing the Superlative Tornqvist and Fisher Ideal Indexes.” Economic Letters 76 (No. 2 2002): 251-58. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-1765(02)00049-6]
  • Edge, R. M., Laubach, T., and Williams, J. C. The Responses of Wages and Prices to Technology Shocks. Finance and Economics Discussion Papers 2003-65, Federal Reserve Board, 2003. [https://doi.org/10.17016/FEDS.2003.65]
  • Edge, R. M., Laubach, T., and Williams, J. C. Learning and Shifts in Long-run Productivity Growth. Finance and Economics Discussion Papers 2004-21, Federal Reserve Board, 2004. [https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.530745]
  • Erceg, C. J., Guerrieri, L., and Gust, C. Productivity Growth and the Trade Balance in the 1990s: the Role of Evolving Perceptions. Mimeo, Federal Reserve Board, 2002.
  • Fernald, J. G., and Ramnath, S. “The Acceleration in U.S. Total Factor Productivity after 1995: The Role of Information Technology.” Economic Perspectives 28 (No. 1 2004): 52-67.
  • Fukao, K., Ikeuchi, K., Kim, Y., Kwon, H., and Makino, T. “International Competitiveness: a Comparison of the Manufacturing Sectors in Korea and Japan.” Seoul Journal of Economics 29 (No. 1 2016): 43-68.
  • GGDC. “60-industry database.” Groningen Growth and Development Center. 2004 Available at www.ggdc.net, .
  • Ghironi, F., and Melitz, M. J. “International Trade and Macroeconomic Dynamics with Heterogenous Firms.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 120 (No. 3 2005): 865-915. [https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/120.3.865]
  • Greenwood, J., Hercowitz, Z., and Krusell, P. “Long-run Implications of Investment-specific Technological Change.” American Economic Review 87 (No. 3 1997): 342-362.
  • Guerrieri, L., Henderson, D., and Kim, J. “Modeling Investment Sector Efficiency Shocks: When Does Disaggregation Matter?” International Economic Review 55 (No. 3 2014): 891-917. [https://doi.org/10.1111/iere.12075]
  • Hunt, B., and Rebucci, A. The U.S. Dollar and the Trade Deficit: What Accounts for the Late 1990s? IMF Working Paper No. 03/194, 2003. [https://doi.org/10.5089/9781451859881.001]
  • Inklaar, R., O’Mahony, M., Robinson, K., and Timmer, M. “Productivity and Competitiveness in the EU and the U.S.” In M. O’Mahony and B. van Ark (eds.), EU Productivity and Competitiveness: An Industry Perspective, Can Europe Resume the Catching-up Process?, Chapter 3, Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, pp. 73-147, 2003. Available at www.ggdc.net, .
  • Jorgenson, D. W. “Information Technology and the G7 Economies.” World Economics 4 (No. 4 2003): 162-69.
  • Jorgenson, D. W. “Information Technology and the G7 Economies.” Department of Economics, Harvard University, Massachusetts, March, 2004. Available at http://www.tiger.edu.pl/konferencje/maj2004/Jorgenson.pdf, .
  • Jorgenson, D. W. “Accounting for Growth in the Information Age.” In P. Aghion and S. Durlauf (eds.), Handbook of Economic Growth, Volume I, Part A, Amsterdam: North Holland, pp. 743-815, 2005. Available at http://emlab.berkeley.edu/users/chad/Handbook.html. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-0684(05)01010-5]
  • Kollmann, R. “U.S. Trade Balance Dynamics: the Role of Fiscal Policy and Productivity Shocks and of Financial Market Linkages.” Journal of International Money and Finance 17 (No. 4 1998): 637-669. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5606(98)00022-9]
  • Laxton, D., and Pesenti, P. “Monetary Rules for Small, Open, Emerging Economies.” Journal of Monetary Economics 50 (No. 5 2003): 1109-1146. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3932(03)00057-6]
  • Oliner, S. D., and Sichel, D. E. “The Resurgence of Growth in the Late 1990s: Is Information Technology the Story?” Journal of Economic Perspectives 14 (No. 4 2000): 3-22. [https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.14.4.3]
  • OECD (2004). Stan database. Available at www.oecd.org/sti/stan.
  • Schmitt-Grohe, S., and Uribe, M. “Closing Small Open Economy Models.” Journal of International Economics 61 (No. 1 2003): 163-185. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1996(02)00056-9]
  • Pilat, D., and Schreyer, P. Measuring Productivity: OECD, 2001. [https://doi.org/10.1787/eco_studies-v2001-art13-en]
  • Stockman, A., and Tesar, L. “Tastes and Technology in a Two-country Model of the Disusiness Cycle: Explaining International Comovements.” American Economic Review 85 (No. 1 1995): 168-185.