Search

Begin New Search Topic Productivity Political Geography United States of America

1. Openness as Strength: The Win-Win in EU-US Digital Services Trade

Author:
Matthias Bauer, Dyuti Pandya, and Oscar du Roy
Publication Date:
03-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
The discourse surrounding the EU’s supposed over-reliance on digital services imports from non-EU countries, particularly the US, has been a recurrent topic among some political circles. However, this viewpoint tends to oversimplify and misrepresent the nuanced and complex reality of the EU’s status within the global Information and Communication Technology (ICT) sector and digitally enabled trade. A thorough analysis of trade data and trends clearly illustrates that the EU’s engagement with foreign (non-EU) digital services, notably from the US, represents a strategic economic advantage, bolstering Europe’s competitiveness and fostering productivity growth. Below we underline the critical importance of openness to foreign innovation and technology diffusion for the EU’s economic future.
Topic:
European Union, Digital Economy, Strategic Competition, Imports, and Productivity
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

2. Keeping Up with the US: Why Europe’s Productivity Is Falling Behind

Author:
Fredrik Erixon, Oscar Guinea, and Oscar du Roy
Publication Date:
05-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
The European Union stands at a crossroads. For decades, the EU’s productivity growth has consistently lagged the United States, leading to slower growth in living standards and decline in global economic power. While short-term factors like the strong US fiscal expansion have widened the gap in nominal GDP growth in recent years, the fact is that Europe has trailed the US economic development for several decades and the root of the problem lies in deeper structural issues within the European economy. Four major forces fuel this productivity divide. Firstly, the EU’s investment in research and development (R&D) pales in comparison to the U.S., leading to fewer patents and a slower pace of technology-fuelled innovation. Secondly, Europe trails America in the stock and growth of intangible capital investments, which are crucial for adopting and diffusing new technologies that drive productivity. Thirdly, the EU market exhibits slower business creation and destruction compared to the US. This rigidity hinders the flow of resources towards the most productive firms. Lastly, despite boasting higher levels of trade openness, the EU attracts less Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) than the US, curbing its access to cutting-edge global technologies and expertise. To close the gap, European policymakers should implement a comprehensive strategy for faster productivity growth. The first step is turning up the dial on R&D spending, targeting 4-5 percent of GDP by 2040. Next, Europe should prioritise investments in intangible assets and lay down the digital infrastructure that will underpin future growth. Revitalising the single market is also crucial: reducing internal and external market barriers for services, the primary vehicle for trading intangible assets. Moreover, the EU should foster a market environment that encourages entrepreneurship and facilitate the entry and exit of firms so resources cascade towards the most productive sectors. By harnessing the strengths of the single market and implementing these recommendations, European policymakers can propel the EU towards a more competitive and prosperous future.
Topic:
Markets, European Union, Productivity, and Economic Competition
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

3. Bridging the Gap: Accelerating Technology Adoption for Sustainable Food Production

Author:
The Chicago Council on Global Affairs
Publication Date:
04-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Chicago Council on Global Affairs
Abstract:
Emerging AgTech innovations have the potential to radically improve the sustainability, profitability, and accessibility of US-produced food. Rapid adoption of agricultural technological (AgTech) innovation is required to meet the future needs of a safe and sustainable US agricultural system that generates more food despite a confluence of obstacles jeopardizing agricultural productivity, while establishing consumer trust to ensure food innovation is accepted by society. With climate change and growing populations putting increasing pressure on our food systems to produce, farmers and their supply chain partners must find a way to rise to food production challenges through the rapid adoption of technology and scientific innovation. However, a recent history of AgTech innovations that failed to achieve widespread consumer acceptance underscores the importance of consumer buy-in for technical innovation in agricultural production. We need to rebuild consumer trust of new technology in food production, streamline and coalesce processes that expedite innovation, and ensure new innovation is accessible and profitable for growers. Based on a June 2023 roundtable, the second in a series of regular convenings, the white paper "Bridging the Gap: Accelerating Technology Adoption for Sustainable Food Production" explores the current development, challenges, and potential of emerging AgTech innovations, and concludes with action recommendations designed to remove barriers and expedite the next generation of AgTech integration in US food production.
Topic:
Agriculture, Science and Technology, Food Security, Sustainability, and Productivity
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

4. What Do We Really Know about Productivity Differentials across Countries?

Author:
Jayati Ghosh
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Political Economy Research Institute (PERI), University of Massachusetts Amherst
Abstract:
This paper examines and critiques the most widely used measure of productivity (output per worker employed) and argues that this is a flawed, inadequate and even misleading measure of economic progress. In terms of cross-country comparisons and assessing trends over time, both the numerator (GDP or value added) and the denominator (number of workers or hours worked) have significant conceptual and measurement problems. These issues are considered in general, and also with regard to how they affect analyses of productivity differentials in the U.S. and India in the recent period.
Topic:
Political Economy, GDP, Employment, Economy, and Productivity
Political Geography:
South Asia, India, North America, and United States of America

5. Productivity and the Pandemic: ShortTerm Disruptions and Long-Term Implications

Author:
Klaas de Vries, Abdul Erumban, and Bart van Ark
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Conference Board
Abstract:
This paper analyses quarterly estimates of productivity growth at industry level for three advanced economies, France, the United Kingdom, and the United States, for 2020. We use detailed industry-level data to distinguish reallocations of working hours between industries from pure within-industry productivity gains or losses. We find that all three countries showed positive growth rates of aggregate output per hour in 2020 over 2019. However, after removing the effects from the reallocation of hours between low and high productivity industries, only the US still performed positively in terms of withinindustry productivity growth. In contrast, the two European economies showed negative within-industry productivity growth rates in 2020. While above-average digital-intensive industries outperformed belowaverage ones in both France and the UK, the US showed higher productivity growth in both groups compared to the European countries. Industries with medium-intensive levels of shares of employees working from home prior to the pandemic made larger productivity gains in 2020 than industries with the highest pre-pandemic work-from-home shares. The paper also experiments with US data on employment at county level by allocating within-industry productivity contributions for 2020 to urban, sub-urban and rural areas, showing that the contributions to within-industry productivity growth from manufacturing and other production industries in urban and sub-urban areas increased during the pandemic. Overall, after taking into account the productivity collapse in the hospitality and culture sector during 2020, productivity growth shows no clear deviation from the slowing pre-pandemic productivity trend. Future trends in productivity growth will depend on whether the favourable productivity gains (or smaller losses) in industries with above-average digital intensity will outweigh negative effects from the pandemic, in particular scarring effects on labour markets and business dynamics.
Topic:
Labor Issues, Work Culture, Pandemic, COVID-19, Productivity, and Digitalization
Political Geography:
United Kingdom, Europe, France, and United States of America

6. Using purchasing power parities to compare countries: Strengths and shortcomings

Author:
Patrick Honohan
Publication Date:
12-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
Abstract:
Good international economic policy requires good comparative data on national economic performance. In May 2020, the World Bank published the latest comprehensive update of purchasing power parities (PPPs), as part of the International Comparison Program. Produced for 176 countries, these PPPs are used to convert data (especially GDP and other quantities based on national income accounts) from national currencies to a common basis in a way that is meaningful for economic analysis. PPP-adjusted data are essential because the distortions caused by sharp exchange rate movements are significant, especially for times of macroeconomic turbulence. The newly released PPP data contain fewer surprises than those published in previous updates and are an invaluable tool, but Honohan explains why PPPs should be used with caution and an understanding of their limitations. Apart from removing distortions caused by market exchange rate movements, PPPs remove the impact of other factors affecting relative prices, especially productivity differences, which Honohan argues should not be removed if one wishes to compare the overall economic size or strength of a country or region. Adjusting for productivity, he finds that the United States retains its position as the world’s largest economy for the time being, and the European Union (even without the United Kingdom) is just ahead of China.
Topic:
World Bank, Economic Growth, Currency, Data, and Productivity
Political Geography:
China, Europe, and United States of America

7. Principled Governance of Shale Resources

Author:
Aspen Institute
Publication Date:
05-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Aspen Institute
Abstract:
Across the US there are a wide variety of opportunities to produce oil and natural gas. These opportunities have been greatly enhanced in recent years with the advent of directional drilling technology combined with hydraulic fracturing completion techniques, which have expanded the economically recoverable oil and natural gas reserves from shale resources. At the same time, the development and production of shale resources have posed real challenges and potential risks to public health and the environment. Considering both the benefits and the potential risks, every state must decide whether new oil and natural gas production should occur.
Topic:
Energy Policy, Oil, Science and Technology, Natural Resources, Governance, Gas, and Productivity
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

8. Race to the Bottom: Low Productivity, Market Power, and Lagging Wages

Author:
Lance Taylor and Özlem Ömer
Publication Date:
08-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET)
Abstract:
“Dualism” in the structure of production across sectors of the US economy, employment by sector, productivity levels and growth, real wages, and intersectoral terms-of trade increased markedly between1990 and 2016. The discussion focuses on 16 sectors. Seven were “stagnant” - - construction, education and health, other services, entertainment, accommodation and food, business services, and transportation and warehousing. They had low productivity levels, productivity growth rates hovering around zero, and low real wages. Their share of total employment rose from 47% in 1990 to 61% in 2016. The other “dynamic” sectors had higher and positively growing productivity while the terms-of- trade shifted against them. This bifurcation between industries is discussed in terms of a simple model. Increasing duality and secular stagnation are distinct possibilities.
Topic:
Economics, Employment, Economic structure, Industry, Productivity, and Wage Growth
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

9. The Impact of Regional and Sectoral Productivity Changes on the U.S. Economy

Author:
Lorenzo Caliendo, Fernando Parro, Esteban Rossi-Hansberg, and Pierre-Daniel Sarte
Publication Date:
10-2014
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Abstract:
We study the impact of regional and sectoral productivity changes on the U.S. economy. To that end, we consider an environment that captures the effects of interregional and intersectoral trade in propagating disaggregated productivity changes at the level of a sector in a given U.S. state to the rest of the economy. The quantitative model we develop features pairwise interregional trade across all 50 U.S. states, 26 traded and non-traded industries, labor as a mobile factor, and structures and land as an immobile factor. We allow for sectoral linkages in the form of an intermediate input structure that matches the U.S. input-output matrix. Using data on trade flows by industry between states, as well as other regional and industry data, we obtain the aggregate, regional and sectoral elasticities of measured TFP, GDP, and employment to regional and sectoral productivity changes. We find that such elasticities can vary significantly depending on the sectors and regions affected and are importantly determined by the spatial structure of the US economy. We highlight the role of these elasticities by tracing out the effects of productivity gains in California in the Computers and Electronics industry between 2002 and 2007 on all other U.S. sectors and regions.
Topic:
Economics, Science and Technology, GDP, Regionalism, and Productivity
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America