Advertisement

Journal of Productivity Analysis

, Volume 2, Issue 4, pp 269–282 | Cite as

Measuring total factor productivity, technical change and the rate of returns to research and development

  • Sang V. Nguyen
  • Edward C. Kokkelenberg
Article
  • 123 Downloads

Abstract

This paper examines the relationship between research and development expenditures and total factor productivity using establishment level (or micro) data. The confidential data are taken from the U.S. Bureau of the Census Annual Survey of Manufacturers and other Census surveys. Several measures of total factor productivity are considered as are several variables that proxy for technical knowledge. The latter include research and development expenditures by the firm, the accumulated research expenditures of the industry, and new equipment purchases. We find that there is a statistically significant relationship among above measures of technical expertise and a broad measure of total factor productivity.

Keywords

Significant Relationship Total Factor Productivity Factor Productivity Technical Change Technical Expertise 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Berndt, Ernst. (1980). “U.S. Productivity Growth by Industry, 1947–1973: Comment.” In John W. Kendrick and Beatrice N. Vaccara, (eds.), New Development in Productivity Measurement and Analysis. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press for the National Bureau of Economics Research.Google Scholar
  2. Berndt, Ernst, and Mohammed S. Khaled. (1979). “Parametric Productivity Measurement and Choice Among Flexible Functional Forms.” Journal of Political Economy, 87, 1220–45.Google Scholar
  3. Christensen, Laurits R., Dale W. Jorgenson, and Lawrence J. Lau. (1971). “Conjugate Duality and the Transcendental Logarithmic Function.” The Review of Economics and Statistics, 53, 255–56.Google Scholar
  4. Diewert, W. Erwin, and Terence J. Wales. (1987). “Flexible functional Forms and Global Curvature Conditions.” Econometrica 55, 43–68.Google Scholar
  5. Gollop, Frank M., and Mark J. Roberts. (1981). “The Sources of Growth in the U.S. Electric Power Industry.” In Cowing, Thomas G., and Rodney E. Stevenson, (eds.) Productivity Measurement in Regulated Industries. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  6. Griliches, Zvi. (1973). “Research Expenditures and Growth Accounting.” In B.R. Williams, (ed.), Science and Technology in Economic Growth. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
  7. Griliches, Zvi. (1980a). “R&D and Productivity Slowdown.” American Economic Review, 70, 343–48.Google Scholar
  8. Griliches, Zvi. (1980b). “Returns to Research and Development Expenditures in the Private Sector.” In John W. Kendrick and Beatrice N. Vaccara, (eds.), New Development in Productivity Measurement and Analysis. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press for the National Bureau of Economics Research.Google Scholar
  9. Griliches, Zvi. (1984). (ed.). R&D Patents, and Productivity. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press for the National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
  10. Griliches, Zvi. (1986). “Productivity, R&D, and Basic Research at the Firm Level in the 1970s.” American Economic Review, 76, 141–154.Google Scholar
  11. Griliches, Zvi, and F.R. Lichtenberg. (1984). “R&D and Productivity Growth at the Industry Level: Is There Still a Relationship?” In Zvi Griliches, (ed.) R&D Patents, and Productivity. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press for the National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
  12. Hall, Robert E. (1986a). “The Relationship Between Price and Marginal Cost in U.S. Industry,” Working Papers in Economics E-86-24, Hoover Institution, Stanford University.Google Scholar
  13. Hall, Robert E. (1986b). “Chronic Express Capacity in U.S. Industry,” Working Paper Number 1973, National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
  14. Halter, A.N., H.O. Carter, and J.G. Hocking. (1957). “A Note on the Transcendental Production Function.” Journal of Farm Economics, 466–74.Google Scholar
  15. Jorgenson, Dale W. (1988). “Productivity and Economic Growth.” Mimeo, Washington Meeting of the Conference on Research and Income and Wealth, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  16. Judge, G.G., W.E. Griffiths, R.C. Hill, and T.C. Lee. (1980). The Theory and Practice of Econometrics. New York: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  17. Kokkelenberg, Edward C. and Sang V. Nguyen. (1987). “Forecasting Comparison of Three Flexible Functional Forms.” Proceedings of the Business and Economics Statistics Section, American Statistical Association, 57–64.Google Scholar
  18. Kokkelenberg, Edward C. and Sang V. Nguyen. (1989). “Modelling Technical Progress and Total Factor Productivity: A Plant Level Example.” Journal of Productivity Analysis, 21–42.Google Scholar
  19. Lichtenberg, Frank R., and Donald Seigel. (1987). “Using Linked Census R&D-LED Data to Analyze the Effect of R&D Investment on Total Factor Productivity Growth.” Mimeo, New York: Columbia University.Google Scholar
  20. Link, Albert N. (1980). “Firm Size and Efficient Entrepreneurial Activity.” Journal of Political Economy, 88, 771–782.Google Scholar
  21. Link, Albert N. (1987). Technological Change and Productivity Growth. Chur, Switzerland: Harwood Academic Publisher.Google Scholar
  22. Maddison, Angus. (1987). “Growth and Slowdown in Advanced Capitalist Economies.” The Journal of Economic Literature, 25, 649–698.Google Scholar
  23. Mansfield, Edwin. (1986). Industrial Research and Technological Innovations. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 133–191.Google Scholar
  24. Mansfield, Edwin. (1969). “Research and Development Production Functions, and Rates of Returns.” American Economic Review, 59, 80–85.Google Scholar
  25. Morrison, Catherine R., and W. Erwin Diewert. (1987). “New Techniques in the Measurement of Multifactor Productivity.” Paper presented at the National Bureau of Economic Research Spring Meeting of the Productivity Workshop, March 20.Google Scholar
  26. Nelson, Richard R., Merton J. Peck, and Edward D. Calacheck. (1967). Technology, Economic Growth, and Public Policy. Washington, D.C.: Brookings.Google Scholar
  27. Ohta, Makoto. (1974). “A Note on the Duality Between Production and Cost Functions: Rate of Returns to Scale and Rate of Technical Progress.” Economic Studies Quarterly, 25, 63–65.Google Scholar
  28. Pilkington, L.A.D. (1969). “The Float Glass Process.” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series A, 314, 1–25.Google Scholar
  29. Sherer, Frederic M. (1984). “Using Linked Patent and R&D Data to Measure Interindustry Technology Flows.” In Zvi Griliches, (ed.), R&D Patents, and Productivity. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press for the National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
  30. Terleckyj, Nestor E. (1974). Effects of R&D on the Productivity Growth of Industries: An Exploratory Study, Report No. 140. Washington DC: National Planning Association.Google Scholar
  31. Terleckyj, Nestor E. (1980). “What Do R&D Numbers Tell Us About Technical Change?” American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 70, 55–61.Google Scholar
  32. Terleckyj, Nestor E. (1982). “R&D and the U.S. Industrial Productivity in the 1970s.” In Sahal, Devendia, (ed.). The Transfer and Utilization of Technical Knowledge. Lexington, Mass: D.C. Heath.Google Scholar
  33. Terleckyj, Nestor E. (1983). “R&D as a Source of Growth of Productivity and of Income.” In Franke, R.H. and Associates, (ed.), The Science of Productivity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  34. Terleckyj, Nestor E. (1984). “R&D and Productivity Growth at the Industry Level: Is There Still a Relationship: Comment.” In Zvi Griliches, (ed.), R&D Patents, and Productivity. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press for the National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sang V. Nguyen
    • 1
  • Edward C. Kokkelenberg
    • 2
  1. 1.Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Bureau of the CensusWashington, DC
  2. 2.Department of Economics and School of ManagementState University of New YorkBinghamton

Personalised recommendations