MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1591097562 · doi:10.1108/17410401111123535

TFP growth, technological progress and efficiencies change

2011· article· en· W1591097562 on OpenAlex
Mahamat Hamit‐Haggar

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Productivity and Performance Management · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Productivity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTotal factor productivityAllocative efficiencyEconomicsProductivityProduction–possibility frontierTechnological changeTechnology gapPanel dataOpenness to experienceTechnical changeManufacturingLabour economicsEconometricsInternational tradeMacroeconomicsBusinessMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to apply a stochastic Frontier production model to Canadian manufacturing industries, to investigate the sources of total factor productivity (TFP) growth. As productivity (growth) appears to be the single most important determinant of a nation's living standard or its level of real income over long periods of time, it is important to better understand the sources of productivity growth. In Canada, TFP growth is the major contributing factor (relative to changes in capital intensity) to labour productivity growth, particularly in manufacturing sector. However, the TFP gap is also the main source of labour productivity gap between Canada and other industrialized (Organization for Economic Co‐operation and Development) countries in recent years. Design/methodology/approach In this paper, a stochastic Frontier production model is applied to Canadian manufacturing industries to investigate the sources of TFP growth. Using a comprehensive panel data set of 18 industries over the period 1990‐2005 and the approach proposed by Kumbhakar et al. and Kumbhakar and Lovell, TFP growth is decomposed into technological progress (TP), changes in technical efficiency, changes in allocative efficiency and scale effects. Findings The decomposition reveals that during the period under study, TP has been the main driving force of productivity growth, while negative efficiency changes observed in certain industries have contributed to reduce average productivity growth. In addition, the empirical results show that research and development expenditure, information and communications technology investment, as well as trade openness exert a positive impact on productivity growth through the channel of efficiency gains. Originality/value The author argues that the decomposition carried out in this study may be very helpful to elicit the correct diagnosis of Canada's productivity problem and develop effective policies to reverse the situation, thereby reducing Canada's lagging productivity gap.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.248
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.156 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it