Could I recommend to everyone engaged in this debate the International
Productivity Monitor, a a journal published by the Canadian Centre for the
Study of Living Standards, available online at http://www.csls.ca/ipm.asp
Ursula Huws
Quoting "K.J.Mcconway" <[log in to unmask]>:
> I don't disagree that it's an oversimplification in general. It's not an
> oversimplification, I'd say, in terms of the measure(s) of productivity that
> the ONS construct and that are (well, seem to be) the basis of the claims
> about French productivity being 26% higher than the UK. It all depends (as
> ever) on what's meant by productivity.
>
> The 'standard' ONS figures use essentially one measure of output for
> everything, and only one kind of measure of input, which is the amount of
> labour. The output measure for the regularly published UK figures is gross
> value added (GVA, at basic prices). The international comparisons don't use
> GVA, they use GDP, which of course isn't quite the same, and presumably it's
> used because GVA figures aren't available internationally on a comparable
> basis. (However, the OECD publish productivity figures that take more inputs
> into account --- I don't know the details.)
> GDP is GVA + taxes on products - subsidies on products, so comparisons on the
> basis of GDP do suffer from differences in tax regimes and also on subsidy
> regimes (as John alluded to in his reply).
>
> Ray's point about whether any of this is a meaningful measure of output in
> services (or, I'd add, in manufacturing either) is well made. I'd agree that
> the alleged 26% difference probably has not a lot to do with the rhetoric
> about productivity, national chanarecteristics, education and so on that is
> being hung on it.
>
> Regards,
>
> Kevin (no economist!)
>
> Kevin McConway
> Senior Lecturer in Statistics
> Department of Statistics
> The Open University
> Walton Hall
> Milton Keynes MK7 6AA, UK
>
> Phone: +44-1908-653676
> Fax: +44-1908-655515
> email: [log in to unmask]
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email list for Radical Statistics [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
> Behalf Of Ray Thomas
> Sent: 23 March 2005 11:26
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Productivity and growth
>
>
> >Does productivity refer only to manufacturing?
>
> No it doesn't. It's the whole economy, service and all. So the rest of John's
> argument doesn't really follow.
> *********************************
>
> I think this is gross oversimplification. We can measure productivity in
> manufacturing because there is a physical output, and we can trust the
> statisticians to measure quantity times value at different times and for
> different countries.
>
> But services is a different matter. What measures of output are used?
> Are these measures meaningful? The traditional solution was to value
> services at their cost. So productivity in effect measured by wages and
> salaries received!
>
> I imagine that the ONS have tried to find meaningful measures of output for
> services. But this is very tricky as indicated by the discussion on
> measuring productivity in education.
>
> You can see the effects of trying to increase productivity in services in
> automated telephone systems. You have to give your name, address,
> postcode, customer number and wife's maiden name to a computer before you
> can find out whether the organisation is open on Saturdays! The costs of
> making a call are pushed on the consumer. The productivity of the staff of
> the call centre is increased because their conversations with customer are
> shorter. And the size of the call centre is reduced because so many
> customers fail to find their way through the automated system.
>
> Does anyone know how ONS measures of productivity in services are actually
> made?
>
> Ray Thomas
> 35 Passmore, Tinkers Bridge, Milton Keynes MK6 3DY
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> Tel/Fax 01908 679081
>
> ******************************************************
> Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
> message will go only to the sender of this message.
> If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's 'Reply-to-All'
> button to send your message automatically to [log in to unmask]
> *******************************************************
>
> ******************************************************
> Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
> message will go only to the sender of this message.
> If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
> 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
> to [log in to unmask]
> *******************************************************
>
--
____________________________________
This email is sent from Ursula Huws
whilst away from my normal address.
This mailbox is checked regularly but
you may wish to have my alternative
details whilst in Canada from Jan-
March 2005. These are as follows:
Ursula Huws, Visiting Professor
Institute of Political Economy
Room A816, Loeb Building
Carleton University,
Colonel By Drive, Ottawa
Ontario, K1S 5B6, Canada
[log in to unmask]
+1 (613) 520 2600 extension 7566
home telephone: +1 (613) 234 1030
Please copy any important messages
to both addresses.
____________________________________
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
*******************************************************
|