1 / 19

Dean Parham

OECD workshop on productivity measurement and analysis Bern, Switzerland 16-18 October 2006 Empirical analysis of the effects of R&D on productivity: Implications for productivity measurement?. Dean Parham. Motivation. Empirical uncertainty about magnitude of R&D’s effect on productivity

Jims
Download Presentation

Dean Parham

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. OECD workshop on productivity measurement and analysisBern, Switzerland16-18 October 2006Empirical analysis of the effects of R&D on productivity: Implications for productivity measurement? Dean Parham

  2. Motivation • Empirical uncertainty about magnitude of R&D’s effect on productivity • Shanks & Zheng (2006), Econometric Modelling of R&D and Australia’s Productivity, Productivity Commission Staff Working Paper • Not just this study. Widespread through other studies/countries • Certainty about magnitude of effects will be implicit in national accounts if proposals to capitalise R&D are implemented • Canberra II group recommendations • R&D capital would be incorporated into productivity estimates • Is there a problem here?

  3. Outline • Formation of R&D capital stocks • The Shanks & Zheng study • Why the empirical uncertainty? • Capitalisation of R&D in the national accounts • Concluding remarks

  4. 1. Formation of R&D capital stocks • R&D outputs are largely unobservable • Knowledge assets measured by use of R&D inputs • Implicit assumption of constant relationship between R&D inputs and R&D outputs  ie constant productivity of R&D • Accumulated via the perpetual inventory method (PIM)

  5. Business R&D capital stocks: levels

  6. Business R&D capital stocks: annual growth

  7. 120 15% 100 Australia 10% 80 60 5% Foreign Foreign 40 Australia 0% 20 0 -5% 1968 1976 1984 1992 2000 1968 1976 1984 1992 2000 Domestic and foreign business R&D stocks

  8. Characteristics • Generally smooth • Timing and extent of growth in domestic v. foreign stocks • R&D tax concession • Change in structure of R&D •  business • shift to services • firm entry

  9. 2. The Shanks & Zheng study • Conventional framework • Cobb-Douglas specification • ‘Two step’ transformation

  10. Estimation of standard models • Models with limited controls mis-specified • Models with extended controls OK • returns to R&D  point estimates of 60%, but imprecise (include zero) • negative coefficient on either domestic or foreign stock commonly found • other explanators more robust  human capital, ERAs, communications infrastructure, ICT, decentralised wage bargaining • Dynamics and lags • little improvement • Sensitivity testing on PIM depreciation rate • Variation in implied returns, but no improvement in precision

  11. Further exploration • Specification in growth form • elements of endogenous growth • continuation of mixed results • Two equation specification • separate specifications for determinants of domestic R&D and for determinants of productivity • showed more promise • indications that foreign R&D had positive effect via domestic R&D as well as directly

  12. Summary • Effect of R&D on productivity hard to pin down • Mis-specification in standard models • Imprecise estimates • Sensitive to reasonable changes in model and variable specification • Some reasonable models and robust explanation from other factors

  13. 3. Why the empirical uncertainty? • Generic • limited degrees of freedom • multi-collinearity • measurement problems • Country and period specific • shocks to R&D and to productivity • policy changes and ‘phantom’ effects of the R&D tax concession

  14. Measurement: Use of constructed variable to proxy R&D knowledge asset • Smoothness of change. Contributed by two principal assumptions • Constant productivity of R&D • across projects  single price deflator on R&D inputs subsumes differences in value of R&D outputs • across time  same real input use generates same increment to stock in all periods. • Constant (or at least steady change in) depreciation rates

  15. Criticisms • R&D outputs highly heterogeneous. Not same price/value • Productivity of R&D affected inter-temporally by: • technological opportunities • organisation of R&D • policy changes in Australia • Depreciation of knowledge • diversity in depreciation rates • changes in R&D composition affect average depreciation • interactions lead to increasing returns and discontinuities

  16. 4. Capitalisation of R&D in the national accounts • Same essentials  use of the PIM • Open to similar criticisms • concerns about accuracy of measurement of R&D-based knowledge stocks • Flow-on effects • R&D capital enters capital input measure in derivation of productivity estimates • deterministic effect on productivity • smooth effect on productivity growth  smooth change in R&D stocks • small effect?  relative size of R&D capital and conventional productive capital stock, relatively high rental price weight

  17. Criticisms • Doubtful accuracy • ‘Conservative’ but not accurate • R&D not the only form of knowledge accumulation • Different views on how knowledge relates to productivity • not just like a physical asset

  18. Doesn’t look good, but …. • Problems in current procedures • R&D expensed • underestimate value added • particular relationship between R&D and productivity is imposed by default • Choose between the ‘lesser of two evils’ • current: incorrect MFP, errors related to size of current R&D expenditure and to its expensing in the accounts • proposed: inaccurate but ‘smoothed’ effect on MFP, errors related to mismeasurement of knowledge and rental prices and to limitations of specification of relationship between knowledge and productivity

  19. 5. Concluding remarks • Capitalisation may be lesser of the two evils • But that does not make it right • Transparency to assist users • limitations • assumptions • choice? • Communication to improve broader understanding

More Related