Keyword search
Filter results by
Search HelpKeyword(s)
Type
Results
All (6)
All (6) ((6 results))
- Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-206-X2008018Description:
Official data from statistical agencies are not always ideal for cross-country comparisons because of differences in data sources and methodology. Analysts who engage in cross-country comparisons need to carefully choose among alternatives and sometimes adapt data especially for their purposes. This paper develops comparable capital stock estimates to examine the relative capital intensity of Canada and the United States.
To do so, the paper applies common depreciation rates to Canadian and U.S. assets to come up with comparable capital stock estimates by assets and by industry between the two countries. Based on common depreciation rates, it finds that capital intensity is higher in the Canadian business sector than in the U.S. business sector. This is the net result of quite different ratios at the individual asset level. Canada has as higher intensity of engineering infrastructure assets per dollar of gross domestic product produced. Canada has a lower intensity of information and communications technology (ICT) machinery and equipment (M&E). Non-ICT M&E and building assets intensities are more alike in the two countries.
However, these results do not control for the fact that different asset-specific capital intensities between Canada and the United States may be the result of a different industrial structure. When both assets and industry structure are taken into account, the overall picture changes somewhat. Canada's business sector continues to have a higher intensity of engineering infrastructure and about the same intensity of building assets; however, it has a deficit in M&E that goes beyond ICT assets.
Release date: 2008-07-10 - Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-206-X2008016Description:
This paper focuses on the role of investments in infrastructure in Canada. The size of infrastructure investments relative to other capital stock sets this country apart from most other Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. The paper reviews the approaches taken by other researchers to define infrastructure. It then outlines a taxonomy to define those assets that should be considered as infrastructure and that can be used to assess the importance of different types of capital investments. It briefly considers how to define the portion of infrastructure that should be considered 'public'. The final two parts of the paper apply the proposed classification system to data on Canada's capital stock, and ask the following questions: how much infrastructure does Canada have and in which sectors of the economy is this infrastructure located? Finally, the paper investigates how Canada's infrastructure has evolved over the last four decades, both in the commercial and non-commercial sectors, and compares these trends with the pattern that can be found in the United States.
Release date: 2008-03-12 - 3. Multifactor Productivity in Canada: An Evaluation of Alternative Methods of Estimating Capital Services ArchivedSurveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-206-X2007009Description:
This paper examines the effects of alternative specifications of the user costs of capital on the estimated price and volume indices of capital services. It asks how sensitive the results are to the use of exogenous versus endogenous rates of return, to alternate ways of including capital gains, and to whether corrections are made for tax rates. The paper also examines the effect of the various user cost formulae on the measured multifactor productivity growth.
Release date: 2007-04-04 - 4. Depreciation Rates for the Productivity Accounts ArchivedSurveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-206-X2007005Description:
This paper generates depreciation profiles for a diverse set of assets based on patterns of resale prices and retirements. In doing so, it explores the sensitivity of estimates of the growth in capital stock and capital services to alternate estimates of depreciation.
In the first instance, survival analysis techniques are used to estimate changes in valuation of assets over the course of their service life. In the second instance, a two-step procedure is utilized that first estimates the discard function for used assets (assets discarded at zero prices) and then uses the resulting estimates to correct for selection bias that arises when just positive used-asset prices are employed to estimate age-price profiles to produce depreciation rates. For the third method, a discard function and an asset efficiency function are jointly specified and estimated.
These three different methods produce depreciation profiles that follow convex patterns. Accelerated profiles are apparent for many individual assets in the machinery and equipment and structures classes.
We also compare the ex post estimates of length of life that are based on outcomes to ex ante expected lives and find they are much the same. We therefore choose ex ante lives along with information from the ex post rates on the rate of decline in an asset's value to generate a set of depreciation rates for use in the productivity accounts.
We then use our depreciation model to produce estimates of the growth in capital stock and capital services over the 1961 to 1996 period. We find that the resulting estimates of capital stock and capital services are quite similar to those previously produced.
Release date: 2007-02-12 - Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 11F0026M2005004Description:
A statistical agency faces several challenges in building Productivity Accounts. Measures of productivity require that outputs be compared to inputs.
This paper discusses the challenges that a statistical agency faces in this area -as illustrated by the Canadian experience. First, it examines the progress that has been made in developing a system that integrates the Productivity Accounts into the overall System of National Accounts. It also discusses deficiencies that still need to be overcome. Finally, the paper focuses on the need to consider whether the SNA manual should be extended into the area of productivity measurement. The paper argues that the advantage of integrating productivity accounts into the general accounts is sufficiently great that it is time to include more detail on the nature of productivity accounts in the general SNA framework.
Release date: 2005-04-28 - Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-002-M2001001Description:
This document describes the sources, concepts and methods utilized by the Canadian Productivity Accounts and discusses how they compare with their U.S. counterparts.
Release date: 2004-12-24
Data (0)
Data (0) (0 results)
No content available at this time.
Analysis (0)
Analysis (0) (0 results)
No content available at this time.
Reference (6)
Reference (6) ((6 results))
- Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-206-X2008018Description:
Official data from statistical agencies are not always ideal for cross-country comparisons because of differences in data sources and methodology. Analysts who engage in cross-country comparisons need to carefully choose among alternatives and sometimes adapt data especially for their purposes. This paper develops comparable capital stock estimates to examine the relative capital intensity of Canada and the United States.
To do so, the paper applies common depreciation rates to Canadian and U.S. assets to come up with comparable capital stock estimates by assets and by industry between the two countries. Based on common depreciation rates, it finds that capital intensity is higher in the Canadian business sector than in the U.S. business sector. This is the net result of quite different ratios at the individual asset level. Canada has as higher intensity of engineering infrastructure assets per dollar of gross domestic product produced. Canada has a lower intensity of information and communications technology (ICT) machinery and equipment (M&E). Non-ICT M&E and building assets intensities are more alike in the two countries.
However, these results do not control for the fact that different asset-specific capital intensities between Canada and the United States may be the result of a different industrial structure. When both assets and industry structure are taken into account, the overall picture changes somewhat. Canada's business sector continues to have a higher intensity of engineering infrastructure and about the same intensity of building assets; however, it has a deficit in M&E that goes beyond ICT assets.
Release date: 2008-07-10 - Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-206-X2008016Description:
This paper focuses on the role of investments in infrastructure in Canada. The size of infrastructure investments relative to other capital stock sets this country apart from most other Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. The paper reviews the approaches taken by other researchers to define infrastructure. It then outlines a taxonomy to define those assets that should be considered as infrastructure and that can be used to assess the importance of different types of capital investments. It briefly considers how to define the portion of infrastructure that should be considered 'public'. The final two parts of the paper apply the proposed classification system to data on Canada's capital stock, and ask the following questions: how much infrastructure does Canada have and in which sectors of the economy is this infrastructure located? Finally, the paper investigates how Canada's infrastructure has evolved over the last four decades, both in the commercial and non-commercial sectors, and compares these trends with the pattern that can be found in the United States.
Release date: 2008-03-12 - 3. Multifactor Productivity in Canada: An Evaluation of Alternative Methods of Estimating Capital Services ArchivedSurveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-206-X2007009Description:
This paper examines the effects of alternative specifications of the user costs of capital on the estimated price and volume indices of capital services. It asks how sensitive the results are to the use of exogenous versus endogenous rates of return, to alternate ways of including capital gains, and to whether corrections are made for tax rates. The paper also examines the effect of the various user cost formulae on the measured multifactor productivity growth.
Release date: 2007-04-04 - 4. Depreciation Rates for the Productivity Accounts ArchivedSurveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-206-X2007005Description:
This paper generates depreciation profiles for a diverse set of assets based on patterns of resale prices and retirements. In doing so, it explores the sensitivity of estimates of the growth in capital stock and capital services to alternate estimates of depreciation.
In the first instance, survival analysis techniques are used to estimate changes in valuation of assets over the course of their service life. In the second instance, a two-step procedure is utilized that first estimates the discard function for used assets (assets discarded at zero prices) and then uses the resulting estimates to correct for selection bias that arises when just positive used-asset prices are employed to estimate age-price profiles to produce depreciation rates. For the third method, a discard function and an asset efficiency function are jointly specified and estimated.
These three different methods produce depreciation profiles that follow convex patterns. Accelerated profiles are apparent for many individual assets in the machinery and equipment and structures classes.
We also compare the ex post estimates of length of life that are based on outcomes to ex ante expected lives and find they are much the same. We therefore choose ex ante lives along with information from the ex post rates on the rate of decline in an asset's value to generate a set of depreciation rates for use in the productivity accounts.
We then use our depreciation model to produce estimates of the growth in capital stock and capital services over the 1961 to 1996 period. We find that the resulting estimates of capital stock and capital services are quite similar to those previously produced.
Release date: 2007-02-12 - Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 11F0026M2005004Description:
A statistical agency faces several challenges in building Productivity Accounts. Measures of productivity require that outputs be compared to inputs.
This paper discusses the challenges that a statistical agency faces in this area -as illustrated by the Canadian experience. First, it examines the progress that has been made in developing a system that integrates the Productivity Accounts into the overall System of National Accounts. It also discusses deficiencies that still need to be overcome. Finally, the paper focuses on the need to consider whether the SNA manual should be extended into the area of productivity measurement. The paper argues that the advantage of integrating productivity accounts into the general accounts is sufficiently great that it is time to include more detail on the nature of productivity accounts in the general SNA framework.
Release date: 2005-04-28 - Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-002-M2001001Description:
This document describes the sources, concepts and methods utilized by the Canadian Productivity Accounts and discusses how they compare with their U.S. counterparts.
Release date: 2004-12-24
- Date modified: