Keyword search
Filter results by
Search HelpKeyword(s)
Subject
Type
Survey or statistical program
Portal
Results
All (14)
All (14) (0 to 10 of 14 results)
- 1. Long-term Productivity Growth in Manufacturing in Canada and the United States, 1961 to 2003 ArchivedArticles and reports: 15-206-X2007015Geography: CanadaDescription:
In this paper, we provide an international comparison of the growth in Canadian and U.S. manufacturing industries over the 1961-to-2003 period. We find that average annual growth rates of labour productivity growth were almost identical in the Canadian and U.S. manufacturing sectors during this period. But the sources of labour productivity growth differed in the two countries. Intermediate input deepening was a more important source of labour productivity growth in Canada than in the United States, while investment in capital and multifactor productivity (MFP) growth were more important in the United States than in Canada. After 1996, labour productivity growth in Canada was lower than in the United States. The post-1996 slower labour productivity growth in Canada relative to the United States was due to slower growth in MFP and slower growth in capital intensity. The slower MFP growth in Canada accounted for 60% of Canada - United States labour productivity growth difference, and slower growth in capital intensity accounted for 30%. The slower MFP growth in the Canadian manufacturing sector relative to that of the United States after 1996 was due to lower MFP growth in the computer and electronic products industry. The slower growth in capital'labour ratio in the Canadian manufacturing compared with the United States after 1996 is related to the changes in relative prices of capital and labour inputs in the two countries.
Release date: 2007-12-18 - 2. The Canadian Productivity Accounts: Data ArchivedTable: 15-003-XDescription:
The Canadian Productivity Accounts: Data is an electronic publication that contains a series of tables on productivity growth and related variables for the business sector and its 51 major sub-sectors based on the North American Industry Classification System. These tables allow users to have a broader perspective on Canadian economic performance. They complement the information available on CANSIM which offers more detail, particularly at the industry level.
Canadian Productivity Accounts (CPA) are responsible for producing, analyzing and disseminating Statistics Canada's official data on productivity and for producing and integrating data on employment, hours worked and capital services consistent with the Canadian System of National Accounts. To this end, the CPA comprise three programs. The quarterly program provides current estimates on labour productivity and labour costs at the aggregate level for 15 industry groups. The annual national program provides yearly estimates on labour productivity, multifactor productivity and several indicators of sources of growth and competitiveness as they apply to the major sectors of the economy and to the industry level. Lastly, the annual provincial program, as an integral part of the Provincial Economic Accounts, provides estimates on employment, hours worked, labour productivity and labour costs at the industry level for each province and territory.
The Canadian Productivity Accounts: Data covers four series of statistical tables:
Table 1: Output, labour compensation, capital cost and cost of intermediate inputs in current dollars
Table 2: Productivity and related measures
Table 3: Productivity and related measures for the business sector, Canada and United States
Table 4: Productivity and related measures for the manufacturing sector, Canada and United States
Productivity measures the efficiency with which inputs (labour and capital in particular) are utilized in production. Productivity measures can be applied to a single input, such as labour productivity (output per hour worked), as well as to multifactor productivity (output per unit of combined labour and capital inputs). Statistics Canada produces these two main measures of productivity, but other productivity ratios can also be measured (e.g., output per unit of capital services).
Release date: 2007-12-06 - 3. Estimating TFP in the Presence of Outliers and Leverage Points: An Examination of the KLEMS Dataset ArchivedArticles and reports: 11F0027M2007047Geography: CanadaDescription:
This paper examines the effect of aberrant observations in the Capital, Labour, Energy, Materials and Services (KLEMS) database and a method for dealing with them. The level of disaggregation, data construction and economic shocks all potentially lead to aberrant observations that can influence estimates and inference if care is not exercised. Commonly applied pre-tests, such as the augmented Dickey-Fuller and the Kwaitkowski, Phillips, Schmidt and Shin tests, need to be used with caution in this environment because they are sensitive to unusual data points. Moreover, widely known methods for generating statistical estimates, such as Ordinary Least Squares, may not work well when confronted with aberrant observations. To address this, a robust method for estimating statistical relationships is illustrated.
Release date: 2007-12-05 - Articles and reports: 11F0027M2007048Geography: CanadaDescription:
Evaluations of an economy's economic performance are often made using a measure of real gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, which represents the average remuneration (labour income plus capital services) that an economy generates through domestic production.
Because real GDP is a constant dollar measure of the remuneration to capital and labour in an economy, it does not account for who owns the capital, how much of it is used up through production or how relative price shifts affect the volume of goods and services that can be purchased.
Modifications can be made to traditional estimates of GDP to account for these factors. This paper examines the performance of the Canadian economy using alternate measures' gross domestic income, gross national income and net national income. The paper also examines the relative performance of the Canadian and U.S. economies using standard GDP measures and these alternate measures.
The comparison spans the period from 1980 to 2006, but focuses on the 2002-to-2006 period. During these latter years, changes in commodity prices, manufactured goods prices, the exchange rate, international investment income and capital consumption have all contributed importantly to real income growth in Canada.
As a result, a very different picture of relative performance of the Canadian and U.S. economies emerges when an aggregate income measure is used that accounts for relative price changes, international income flows and capital consumption than when real GDP is used. From 2002 to 2006, U.S. real GDP per capita grew 9.3% while Canadian GDP per capita rose 7.0%, making it appear that the U.S. economy was outperforming the Canadian economy. However, once changes in resource prices and the exchange rate, international investment income and capital consumption are taken into account, real income per capita in the United States increased by 8.6%, which is similar to its GDP per capita growth. However, the Canadian adjusted measure of real income per capita growth rose 15.6%, more than twice the per capita real GDP growth in Canada and nearly double the U.S. rate.
In contrast, the difference between the two economies was exactly the opposite in the period from 1980 to 2000 when commodity prices were falling, when the exchange rate was not appreciating and when outward flows of income to foreigners were increasing relative to the income paid to Canadians. During this period, when consideration is given to these factors, real income measures in Canada were falling relative to those in the United States.
Release date: 2007-11-22 - Articles and reports: 11-622-M2007014Geography: CanadaDescription:
The paper's main objective is to provide a concise synthesis of a wide array of data and research on multinationals originating in Statistics Canada, focusing on both historical and current studies.
Chapter 2 discusses the macroeconomic contribution of foreign multinationals, focusing on two leading indicators of foreign multinational activity, foreign control and foreign direct investment. This chapter also describes studies that evaluate the contribution that foreign-controlled companies make to aggregate trade flows, linking changes in multinational trade intensity to the strategic reorganization of their production activities.
Chapter 3 concentrates on the strategies and activities of foreign multinationals that are relevant to ongoing debates over whether the presence of foreign multinationals promotes, or hampers, Canada's industrial competitiveness. This chapter first examines evidence that domestic and foreign firms respond differently to domestic market conditions. Second, it asks whether foreign firms compete in different ways than domestic firms do. Third, it examines the relative emphasis that foreign multinationals place on innovation and technology practices, and reports on the relationship between these activities and observable market outcomes. Fourth, it reports on the contribution that foreign-controlled firms make to productivity growth. Fifth, it discusses new research that focuses on the relationship between foreign ownership and head-office employment. Studies in these areas speak directly to the issue of whether foreign multinationals truncate or develop their corporate activities in host markets.
Chapter 4 focuses on studies that examine the foreign activities of Canadian-owned multinationals and how their domestic plants compare to foreign-controlled plants operating in Canada.
Chapter 5 offers an appraisal of Statistics Canada's research on multinationals.
Release date: 2007-11-13 - Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-206-X2007012Description:
This paper examines the various products associated with the quarterly labour productivity program. It outlines the nature of the volatility in the very short-run estimates and examines properties of the revisions made to the estimates of Canadian labour productivity and its components (gross domestic product and hours worked) since the inception of the program in 2001.
Release date: 2007-10-18 - 7. Update on Analytical Studies Research ArchivedNotices and consultations: 11-015-XDescription:
This newsletter is a brief description of projects within the Business and Labour Market Analysis Division of Statistics Canada. The research covers a wide range of topics including labour market issues, low income, immigration, business firm dynamics, pensions, productivity, technology and innovation, as well as economic geography.
Release date: 2007-09-14 - 8. Productivity Performance in Canada, 1961 to 2005 ArchivedArticles and reports: 15-206-X2007011Description:
This study examines Canadian productivity performance over the period 1961 to 2005. It investigates labour productivity growth and the sources of improvements therein-multifactor productivity growth, capital intensity, and skill upgrading. It also examines the contribution that productivity growth has made to economic growth, and to improvement on living standards. Finally, this study investigates the share of income going to labour, and the real hourly compensation of workers. This publication makes use of the new KLEMS database released on June 25, 2007 (http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/13-605-x/13-605-x2007005-eng.htm).
Release date: 2007-09-13 - Articles and reports: 11-624-M2007016Geography: CanadaDescription:
This study examines differences in gross domestic product (GDP) per capita between Canada and the United States from 1994 to 2005. The gap in GDP per capita between the two countries has narrowed slightly over this period. The study decomposed the gap into two components: one due to labour productivity and one due to labour market conditions, and shows that the relative importance of the two changed considerably after 2000. The output gap has narrowed slightly since 2000, primarily because Canada's labour market experienced a faster rate of job growth relative to its population than did the United States.
Release date: 2007-08-31 - Articles and reports: 15-206-X2007013Geography: CanadaDescription:
This paper compares long-run growth in labour productivity in Canada and the United States from 1961 to 2006. Over the entire period labour productivity in both countries grew at about the same rate. But Canadian growth exceeded that of the United States up to the early 1980s. Since then, U.S. labour productivity growth has exceeded Canadian growth. The gap has widened, particularly after 2000. The paper also decomposes labour productivity growth into three components' that arising from increases in capital intensity, from increases in the skill level of the labour force (due to changes in labour composition) and a residual (multifactor productivity growth). The first two components (both arising from investment, one in machinery and structures, the other in training) were more important in Canada. The third (the residual often referred to as technological progress) was larger in the United States.
Release date: 2007-08-28
Data (1)
Data (1) ((1 result))
- 1. The Canadian Productivity Accounts: Data ArchivedTable: 15-003-XDescription:
The Canadian Productivity Accounts: Data is an electronic publication that contains a series of tables on productivity growth and related variables for the business sector and its 51 major sub-sectors based on the North American Industry Classification System. These tables allow users to have a broader perspective on Canadian economic performance. They complement the information available on CANSIM which offers more detail, particularly at the industry level.
Canadian Productivity Accounts (CPA) are responsible for producing, analyzing and disseminating Statistics Canada's official data on productivity and for producing and integrating data on employment, hours worked and capital services consistent with the Canadian System of National Accounts. To this end, the CPA comprise three programs. The quarterly program provides current estimates on labour productivity and labour costs at the aggregate level for 15 industry groups. The annual national program provides yearly estimates on labour productivity, multifactor productivity and several indicators of sources of growth and competitiveness as they apply to the major sectors of the economy and to the industry level. Lastly, the annual provincial program, as an integral part of the Provincial Economic Accounts, provides estimates on employment, hours worked, labour productivity and labour costs at the industry level for each province and territory.
The Canadian Productivity Accounts: Data covers four series of statistical tables:
Table 1: Output, labour compensation, capital cost and cost of intermediate inputs in current dollars
Table 2: Productivity and related measures
Table 3: Productivity and related measures for the business sector, Canada and United States
Table 4: Productivity and related measures for the manufacturing sector, Canada and United States
Productivity measures the efficiency with which inputs (labour and capital in particular) are utilized in production. Productivity measures can be applied to a single input, such as labour productivity (output per hour worked), as well as to multifactor productivity (output per unit of combined labour and capital inputs). Statistics Canada produces these two main measures of productivity, but other productivity ratios can also be measured (e.g., output per unit of capital services).
Release date: 2007-12-06
Analysis (11)
Analysis (11) (0 to 10 of 11 results)
- 1. Long-term Productivity Growth in Manufacturing in Canada and the United States, 1961 to 2003 ArchivedArticles and reports: 15-206-X2007015Geography: CanadaDescription:
In this paper, we provide an international comparison of the growth in Canadian and U.S. manufacturing industries over the 1961-to-2003 period. We find that average annual growth rates of labour productivity growth were almost identical in the Canadian and U.S. manufacturing sectors during this period. But the sources of labour productivity growth differed in the two countries. Intermediate input deepening was a more important source of labour productivity growth in Canada than in the United States, while investment in capital and multifactor productivity (MFP) growth were more important in the United States than in Canada. After 1996, labour productivity growth in Canada was lower than in the United States. The post-1996 slower labour productivity growth in Canada relative to the United States was due to slower growth in MFP and slower growth in capital intensity. The slower MFP growth in Canada accounted for 60% of Canada - United States labour productivity growth difference, and slower growth in capital intensity accounted for 30%. The slower MFP growth in the Canadian manufacturing sector relative to that of the United States after 1996 was due to lower MFP growth in the computer and electronic products industry. The slower growth in capital'labour ratio in the Canadian manufacturing compared with the United States after 1996 is related to the changes in relative prices of capital and labour inputs in the two countries.
Release date: 2007-12-18 - 2. Estimating TFP in the Presence of Outliers and Leverage Points: An Examination of the KLEMS Dataset ArchivedArticles and reports: 11F0027M2007047Geography: CanadaDescription:
This paper examines the effect of aberrant observations in the Capital, Labour, Energy, Materials and Services (KLEMS) database and a method for dealing with them. The level of disaggregation, data construction and economic shocks all potentially lead to aberrant observations that can influence estimates and inference if care is not exercised. Commonly applied pre-tests, such as the augmented Dickey-Fuller and the Kwaitkowski, Phillips, Schmidt and Shin tests, need to be used with caution in this environment because they are sensitive to unusual data points. Moreover, widely known methods for generating statistical estimates, such as Ordinary Least Squares, may not work well when confronted with aberrant observations. To address this, a robust method for estimating statistical relationships is illustrated.
Release date: 2007-12-05 - Articles and reports: 11F0027M2007048Geography: CanadaDescription:
Evaluations of an economy's economic performance are often made using a measure of real gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, which represents the average remuneration (labour income plus capital services) that an economy generates through domestic production.
Because real GDP is a constant dollar measure of the remuneration to capital and labour in an economy, it does not account for who owns the capital, how much of it is used up through production or how relative price shifts affect the volume of goods and services that can be purchased.
Modifications can be made to traditional estimates of GDP to account for these factors. This paper examines the performance of the Canadian economy using alternate measures' gross domestic income, gross national income and net national income. The paper also examines the relative performance of the Canadian and U.S. economies using standard GDP measures and these alternate measures.
The comparison spans the period from 1980 to 2006, but focuses on the 2002-to-2006 period. During these latter years, changes in commodity prices, manufactured goods prices, the exchange rate, international investment income and capital consumption have all contributed importantly to real income growth in Canada.
As a result, a very different picture of relative performance of the Canadian and U.S. economies emerges when an aggregate income measure is used that accounts for relative price changes, international income flows and capital consumption than when real GDP is used. From 2002 to 2006, U.S. real GDP per capita grew 9.3% while Canadian GDP per capita rose 7.0%, making it appear that the U.S. economy was outperforming the Canadian economy. However, once changes in resource prices and the exchange rate, international investment income and capital consumption are taken into account, real income per capita in the United States increased by 8.6%, which is similar to its GDP per capita growth. However, the Canadian adjusted measure of real income per capita growth rose 15.6%, more than twice the per capita real GDP growth in Canada and nearly double the U.S. rate.
In contrast, the difference between the two economies was exactly the opposite in the period from 1980 to 2000 when commodity prices were falling, when the exchange rate was not appreciating and when outward flows of income to foreigners were increasing relative to the income paid to Canadians. During this period, when consideration is given to these factors, real income measures in Canada were falling relative to those in the United States.
Release date: 2007-11-22 - Articles and reports: 11-622-M2007014Geography: CanadaDescription:
The paper's main objective is to provide a concise synthesis of a wide array of data and research on multinationals originating in Statistics Canada, focusing on both historical and current studies.
Chapter 2 discusses the macroeconomic contribution of foreign multinationals, focusing on two leading indicators of foreign multinational activity, foreign control and foreign direct investment. This chapter also describes studies that evaluate the contribution that foreign-controlled companies make to aggregate trade flows, linking changes in multinational trade intensity to the strategic reorganization of their production activities.
Chapter 3 concentrates on the strategies and activities of foreign multinationals that are relevant to ongoing debates over whether the presence of foreign multinationals promotes, or hampers, Canada's industrial competitiveness. This chapter first examines evidence that domestic and foreign firms respond differently to domestic market conditions. Second, it asks whether foreign firms compete in different ways than domestic firms do. Third, it examines the relative emphasis that foreign multinationals place on innovation and technology practices, and reports on the relationship between these activities and observable market outcomes. Fourth, it reports on the contribution that foreign-controlled firms make to productivity growth. Fifth, it discusses new research that focuses on the relationship between foreign ownership and head-office employment. Studies in these areas speak directly to the issue of whether foreign multinationals truncate or develop their corporate activities in host markets.
Chapter 4 focuses on studies that examine the foreign activities of Canadian-owned multinationals and how their domestic plants compare to foreign-controlled plants operating in Canada.
Chapter 5 offers an appraisal of Statistics Canada's research on multinationals.
Release date: 2007-11-13 - 5. Productivity Performance in Canada, 1961 to 2005 ArchivedArticles and reports: 15-206-X2007011Description:
This study examines Canadian productivity performance over the period 1961 to 2005. It investigates labour productivity growth and the sources of improvements therein-multifactor productivity growth, capital intensity, and skill upgrading. It also examines the contribution that productivity growth has made to economic growth, and to improvement on living standards. Finally, this study investigates the share of income going to labour, and the real hourly compensation of workers. This publication makes use of the new KLEMS database released on June 25, 2007 (http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/13-605-x/13-605-x2007005-eng.htm).
Release date: 2007-09-13 - Articles and reports: 11-624-M2007016Geography: CanadaDescription:
This study examines differences in gross domestic product (GDP) per capita between Canada and the United States from 1994 to 2005. The gap in GDP per capita between the two countries has narrowed slightly over this period. The study decomposed the gap into two components: one due to labour productivity and one due to labour market conditions, and shows that the relative importance of the two changed considerably after 2000. The output gap has narrowed slightly since 2000, primarily because Canada's labour market experienced a faster rate of job growth relative to its population than did the United States.
Release date: 2007-08-31 - Articles and reports: 15-206-X2007013Geography: CanadaDescription:
This paper compares long-run growth in labour productivity in Canada and the United States from 1961 to 2006. Over the entire period labour productivity in both countries grew at about the same rate. But Canadian growth exceeded that of the United States up to the early 1980s. Since then, U.S. labour productivity growth has exceeded Canadian growth. The gap has widened, particularly after 2000. The paper also decomposes labour productivity growth into three components' that arising from increases in capital intensity, from increases in the skill level of the labour force (due to changes in labour composition) and a residual (multifactor productivity growth). The first two components (both arising from investment, one in machinery and structures, the other in training) were more important in Canada. The third (the residual often referred to as technological progress) was larger in the United States.
Release date: 2007-08-28 - 8. The Canadian Lumber Industry: Recent Trends ArchivedArticles and reports: 11-621-M2007055Geography: CanadaDescription:
This study examines recent trends in the Canadian softwood lumber industry in Canada up to 2006. Trends in shipments, production, exports, productivity, innovation and financial results are analysed in the context of recent economic and commercial pressures affecting the industry.
Release date: 2007-06-07 - 9. Factors Driving Canada's Rural Economy ArchivedArticles and reports: 21-601-M2007083Description:
This working paper outlines the results of a new study that notes that technology, prices and demography are key forces driving the economy in the nation's rural areas.
Release date: 2007-02-13 - 10. Provincial Labour Productivity Growth, 1997 to 2005 ArchivedArticles and reports: 15-206-X2007007Geography: Province or territoryDescription:
Productivity statistics garner much attention because they are key indicators of economic progress. This paper reports on the average growth in provincial labour productivity from 1997 to 2005. It examines how medium-term differences in productivity growth have affected the relative levels of labour productivity in different provinces. The data show that the relative position of most provinces has remained fairly stable over the 1997-to-2005 period when benchmarked against changes in the national average. The notable exception is Newfoundland and Labrador, which experienced much stronger average productivity growth during this period than other provinces. This growth substantially improved its relative labour productivity when evaluated in real terms.
The paper also examines the effect that a second factor - changes in the prices received for products - has had on nominal productivity differences between provinces. The data show that the resource-rich provinces of Alberta and Newfoundland and Labrador have benefited substantially from higher relative prices.
Release date: 2007-01-15
Reference (2)
Reference (2) ((2 results))
- Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-206-X2007012Description:
This paper examines the various products associated with the quarterly labour productivity program. It outlines the nature of the volatility in the very short-run estimates and examines properties of the revisions made to the estimates of Canadian labour productivity and its components (gross domestic product and hours worked) since the inception of the program in 2001.
Release date: 2007-10-18 - 2. Update on Analytical Studies Research ArchivedNotices and consultations: 11-015-XDescription:
This newsletter is a brief description of projects within the Business and Labour Market Analysis Division of Statistics Canada. The research covers a wide range of topics including labour market issues, low income, immigration, business firm dynamics, pensions, productivity, technology and innovation, as well as economic geography.
Release date: 2007-09-14
- Date modified: