Total factor productivity - a misleading concept
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.13133/2037-3643/9935Keywords:
Factor Productivity, Production Function, Production, Productivity, Total Factor ProductivityAbstract
The paper criticises the concept of total factor productivity as a measure of technical change and economic performance on two grounds: (i) theoretical, because it shares all the weaknesses of the neoclassical production function from which it is derived; (ii) its relevance in helping to understand the present technological revolution in computer and information technologies, since it concerns only disembodied technical change. The practical conclusion is that total factor productivity is more a measure of "noise" than a genuine indicator of technical progress. In spite of the above drawbacks, total factor productivity is still widely used in empirical work on technical change. This is all the more surprising since the alternative concept of productivity of labour not only avoids the above mentioned criticisms but is theoretically superior to its rival concept because it captures the true nature of present technical change.
JEL Codes: J24, D24, O47
References
AHMAD, S. (1991), Capital in Economic Theory. Neo-classical, Cambridge and Chaos,Edward Elgar, Aldershot.
BRESNAHAN, T.F. (1989), "Empirical studies of industries with market power", in R. Schmalensee and R.D. Willig eds, Handbook of Industrial Organization, vol.III, North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 1011-57.
BRYNJOLFSSON, E. and B. KAHIN eds (2000), Understanding the Digital Economy.Data, Tools and Research, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
EUROSTAT (1996), European System of Accounts. ESA 1995, Luxembourg.
FELIPE, J. and J.S.L. MCCOMBIE (2002), "A problem with some estimations and interpretations of the mark-up in manufacturing industry", mimeo (forthcoming in International Review of Applied Economics).
FRIEDMAN, M. (1953), Essays in Positive Economics, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
HALL, R.E. (1988), "The relation between price and marginal cost in U.S. industry", Journal of Political Economy, vol. 96, no. 5, pp. 921-47.
HARCOURT, G.C. (1972), Some Cambridge Controversies in the Theory of Capital, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
HARTLEY, J.E. (2000), "Does the Solow residual actually measure changes in technology?", Review of Political Economy, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 27-44.
HODGSON, G.M. (1988), Economics and Institutions: A Manifesto for Modern Institutional Economics, Polity Press, Cambridge.
MCCOMBIE, J.S.L. (2000-2001), "The Solow residual, technical change, and aggregate production functions", Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 267-97.
MUSGRAVE, A. (1981), "'Unreal assumptions' in economic theory: the F-twist untwisted", Kyklos, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 377-87.
NORDHAUS, W.D. (1997), "Traditional productivity estimates are asleep at the (technological) switch", The Economic Journal, vol. 107, no. 444, pp. 1548-59.
OECD (1991), Technology and Productivity: The Challenge for Economic Policy, Paris.
OECD (1996), The OECD Jobs Strategy. Technology, Productivity and Job Creation; vol.1: Highlights; vol. 2: Analytical Report, Paris.
PASINETTI, L.L. (2000), "Critique of the neoclassical theory of growth and distribution", Banca Nazionale del Lavoro Quarterly Review, vol. LIII, no. 215, pp. 383-431.
REATI, A. (1990), Taux de profit et accumulation du capital dans l'onde longue de l'aprèsguerre. Le cas de l'industrie au Royaume-Uni, en France, en Italie et en Allemagne, Editions de l'Université de Bruxelles, Bruxelles.
RONCAGLIA, A. (1973), "La riduzione di lavoro complesso a lavoro semplice", Note Economiche, n. 3, pp. 97-112.
SHAIKH, A. (1974), "Laws of production and laws of algebra: the Humbug production function", The Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 56, no. 1, pp. 115- 20.
SHAIKH, A. (1980), "Laws of production and laws of algebra: Humbug II", in E.J. Nell ed., Growth, Profits and Property. Essays in the Revival of Political Economy, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 80-95.
SOLOW, R.M. (1957), "Technical change and the aggregate production function", The Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 312-20.
SOLOW, R.M. (1960), "Investment and technical progress, in K. Arrow, S. Karlin and P. Suppes eds, Mathematical Methods in the Social Sciences, 1959. Proceedings of the First Standford Symposium, Stanford University Press, Stanford, pp. 89-104.
SOLOW, R.M. (1987), "Second thoughts on growth theory", in A. Steinherr and D. Weiserbs eds, Employment and Growth: Issues for the 1980s, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 13-28.
STIROH, K.J. (2001), "What drives productivity growth", Federal Reserve Bank of New York Economic Policy Review (forthcoming).
SYLOS LABINI, P. (1995), "Why the interpretation of the Cobb-Douglas production function must be radically changed", Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 485-504.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
