Keyword search
Filter results by
Search HelpKeyword(s)
Subject
Type
Year of publication
Survey or statistical program
Results
All (21)
All (21) (10 to 20 of 21 results)
- 11. Recent trends in output and employment ArchivedArticles and reports: 11-010-X20070039602Geography: Province or territoryDescription:
The productivity slowdown during 2006 largely originated in the mining and manufacturing industries. The drop in mining was part of a long-term trend, while for manufacturing it was mostly cyclical. Many sectors struggled with labour quality as a result of shortages, especially in western Canada.
Release date: 2007-03-15 - 12. Understanding Productivity: A Primer ArchivedSurveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-206-X2006002Description:
This paper provides a concise overview in plain language of the concept of productivity by explaining its relevance and usefulness. This paper is intended for users of the Canadian Productivity Accounts who wish to learn more about productivity concepts, in simple terms.
Release date: 2006-04-21 - 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 - 14. Canada's Investments in Science and Innovation: Is the Existing Concept of Research and Development Sufficient? ArchivedArticles and reports: 11F0027M2005032Geography: CanadaDescription:
Estimates of GDP are sensitive to whether a business expenditure is treated as an investment or an intermediate input. Shifting an expenditure category from intermediate expenditures to investment expenditures increases GDP. While the international guide to measurement (the SNA (93)) recognizes that R&D has certain characteristics that make it more akin to an investment than an intermediate expenditure, it did not recommend that R&D be treated as an investment because of problems in finding a "clear criteria for delineating [R&D] from other activities".
This paper examines whether the use of the OECD Frascati definition is adequate for this purpose. It argues that it is too narrow and that attempts to modify the National Accounts would not be well served by its adoption. In particular, it argues that the appropriate concept of R&D that is required for the Accounts should incorporate a broad range of science-based innovation costs and that this broader R&D concept is amenable to measurement.
Finally, the paper argues that failing to move in the direction of an expanded definition of R&D capital will have consequences for comparisons of Canadian GDP to that of other countries - in particular, our largest trading partner, the United States. It would provide a biased estimate of Canada's GDP relative to the United States. If all science-based innovation expenditures are to be capitalized, GDP will increase. But it appears that Canada's innovation system is directed more towards non-R&D science-based expenditures than the innovation systems of many other countries. If Canada were to only capitalize the narrow Frascati definition of R&D expenditures and not a broader class of science-based innovation expenditures, we would significantly bias estimates of Canadian GDP relative to those for other countries, such as the United States, whose innovation systems concentrate more on traditional R&D expenditures.
Release date: 2005-04-12 - 15. A Comparison of Canadian and U.S. Productivity Levels: An Exploration of Measurement Issues ArchivedArticles and reports: 11F0027M2005028Geography: CanadaDescription:
This paper examines the level of labour productivity in Canada relative to that of the United States in 1999. In doing so, it addresses two main issues. The first is the comparability of the measures of GDP and labour inputs that the statistical agency in each country produces. Second, it investigates how a price index can be constructed to reconcile estimates of Canadian and U.S. GDP per hour worked that are calculated in Canadian and U.S. dollars respectively. After doing so, and taking into account alternative assumptions about Canada/U.S. prices, the paper provides point estimates of Canada's relative labour productivity of the total economy of around 93% that of the United States. The paper points out that at least a 10 percentage point confidence interval should be applied to these estimates. The size of the range is particularly sensitive to assumptions that are made about import and export prices.
Release date: 2005-01-20 - 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 - Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-002-MDescription:
This series of articles provides users with an understanding of the notion of productivity and the underlying statistical standards, concepts, and methods used to compile the productivity statistics.
This series enables users to better judge the economic significance, quality and accuracy of the productivity statistics. It is particularly designed for those who regularly use the productivity estimates, such as academics and economic and financial analysts. It is also a reference for others who use the productivity figures less frequently, such as students of economics.
Release date: 2004-12-24 - 18. Whatever Happened to Canada-United States Economic Growth and Productivity Performance in the Information Age? ArchivedArticles and reports: 11F0027M2004025Geography: CanadaDescription:
Productivity growth in the U.S. economy jumped during the second half of the 1990s, a resurgence that the literature linked to information technology use. This report contributes to this debate in two ways. First, using the most comparable Canadian and U.S. data available, the contributions of information technology to output, capital input, and productivity performance are quantified. Second, the report examines the extent to which information technology-producing and information technology-using industries have contributed to the aggregate multifactor productivity revival.
Release date: 2004-11-23 - Articles and reports: 11F0019M2003193Geography: CanadaDescription:
This paper outlines the size of the turnover in plants that have entered and exited the Canadian manufacturing sector during the three periods: 1973-1979, 1979-1988 and 1988-1997. It also examines the contribution of plant turnover to labour productivity growth in the manufacturing sector over the three periods. Plant turnover makes a significant contribution to productivity growth as more productive entrants replace exiting plants that are less productive. A disproportionately large fraction of the contribution of plant turnover to productivity growth is due to multi-plant or foreign-controlled firms closing down and opening up new plants. The plants opened up by multi-plant or foreign-controlled firms are typically much more productive than those opened by single-plant or domestic-controlled.
Release date: 2003-04-02 - Articles and reports: 62F0014M1996003Geography: CanadaDescription:
Productivity analysis is one of the major foundations of the analysis of long-term economic growth. It is important to study productivity in order to identify the factors that contribute to it and to explore the relationship that exists between productivity, growth and international competitiveness.
Statistics Canada produces partial productivity indexes for some 30 industries and the business sector of the economy on an annual basis. However, little is known about the real output, productivity, and price trends in the construction industry. Four opportunities for productivity research in the construction industry are evident, (a) investigation of the available productivity measures, (b) alternative approaches to the implicit methods currently used in the compilation of output price indexes, (c) estimation of productivity within particular sectors of the construction industry, and (d) comparison of productivity on an interprovincial or international basis.
In this paper we will focus on the first two of the four alternatives and will give examples of the last two. In particular, by formalizing the adjustments that are made to the input factors used in the development of output indexes, we contend that the result will be more impartial and enduring. Generally, our goal is to investigate and promote measures that will be available and attractive to the construction industry as it begins to demand more electronic information. The purpose is to derive, eventually, some new productivity estimates based upon the best available statistics.
Release date: 1997-05-05
Data (0)
Data (0) (0 results)
No content available at this time.
Analysis (13)
Analysis (13) (0 to 10 of 13 results)
- Articles and reports: 15-206-X2014038Description:
This paper provides an overview of the productivity program at Statistics Canada and a brief description of Canada’s productivity performance. The paper defines productivity and the various measures that are used to investigate different aspects of productivity growth. It describes the difference between partial productivity measures (such as labour productivity) and a more complete measure (multifactor productivity) and the advantages and disadvantages of each. The paper explains why productivity is important. It outlines how productivity growth fits into the growth accounting framework and how this framework is used to examine the various sources of economic growth. The paper briefly discusses the challenges that face statisticians in measuring productivity growth. It also provides an overview of Canada’s long-term productivity performance and compares Canada to the United States—both in terms of productivity levels and productivity growth rates.
Release date: 2014-09-15 - Articles and reports: 15-206-X2014036Description:
Leasing is an important means of gaining access to assets, of obtaining finance, and of reducing a lessee’s exposure to the risks inherent to asset ownership. A lease can be either a financial lease (capital lease) or an operating lease (capital rental). A financial lease is one where the legal owner of an asset (lessor) passes the economic ownership to the user of the asset (lessee), who then accepts the operating risks and receives the economic benefits from using the asset in a productive activity. Under an operating lease, the lessor is both the legal owner and the economic owner of the asset leased (rented), bearing the operating risks and receiving the economic benefits from the asset. The lessor transfers only the right to use the asset to the lessee.
Leasing offers firms the possibility to acquire the right to use capital assets under terms that differ from those prevailing through other financial instruments. The recording of leased assets in the Canadian System of National Accounts is ownership-based rather than user-based. The separation of capital ownership, in particular legal ownership, from the use of capital assets poses challenges to productivity measurement. To obtain consistent productivity measures at an industry level, leased and rented capital assets must be reallocated from owners’ accounts to users’ accounts. By using the General Index of Financial Information (GIFI) corporate balance sheets and detailed input-output tables, this paper tests the robustness of existing practices of data collection on leased and rented capital.
Release date: 2014-07-22 - 3. Experimental Measures of Output and Productivity in the Canadian Hospital Sector, 2002 to 2010 ArchivedArticles and reports: 15-206-X2014034Description:
Recent discussions about health care spending have focused on two issues: 1) the extent to which the increase in heath care spending is due to an increase in the quantity as opposed to the price of health care services, and 2) the efficiency and productivity of health care providers (e.g., hospital sectors, office of physicians, and long-term care).
The key to addressing both issues is a direct output measure of health care services—a measure that does not currently exist. In the National Accounts, output of the health care sector is measured by the volume of inputs, which includes labour costs for physicians, nurses and administrative staff, consumption of capital, and intermediate inputs. An input-based output measure assumes that there are no productivity gains in the health care sector. As a result, it does not provide a measure of productivity performance, nor does it allow a decomposition of total health care expenditures into price and output quantity components.
The main objective of this paper is to develop an experimental direct output measure for the Canadian hospital sector that can be used to address those issues. A large number of countries have already constructed a direct output measure of the hospital sector and other healthcare sectors.
Release date: 2014-04-23 - 4. Productivity Growth and Capacity Utilization ArchivedArticles and reports: 11F0027M2013085Geography: CanadaDescription:
This paper presents a non-parametric approach for adjusting the multifactor productivity growth (MFPG) measure for variations in capacity utilization over time. In the framework developed here, a capital utilization measure is derived from the economic theory of production and is estimated by comparing the ex-post return with the ex-ante expected return on capital. The non-parametric approach is then compared with the parametric approach and the standard growth accounting framework. Both the non-parametric and parametric approaches correct for the cyclical bias in the standard MFPG measure, but the non-parametric approach offers more practical adjustment for capacity utilization, because it is easier to implement and more in line with the non-parametric approach long used by statistical agencies and researchers.
Release date: 2013-07-23 - Articles and reports: 11F0027M2011071Geography: CanadaDescription:
This paper asks how the performance of self-employed unincorporated businesses affects the size of the gap in labour productivity between Canada and the United States. To do so, the business sector in each country is divided into unincorporated and corporate businesses, and estimates of labour productivity are generated for each sector.
The productivity performance of the unincorporated sector relative to the corporate sector is much lower in Canada than in the United States. As a result, when the unincorporated sector is removed from the estimates for the business sector in each country and only the corporate sectors for the two countries are compared, the gap in the level of productivity between Canada and the United States is reduced.
The unincorporated sector consists of both sole proprietorships and partnerships. This paper also investigates the impact of just sole proprietorships on the Canada-United States productivity gap. Sole proprietorships in the two countries more closely resemble one another than do partnerships, as U.S. partnerships are much larger than their Canadian counterparts.
When sole proprietorships are removed from the business-sector estimates of each country (allowing a comparison of sole proprietorships to the rest of the business sector, which consists of partnerships and the corporate sector), the gap in labour productivity between Canada and the United States also declines but by only about half as much as when both sole proprietorships and partnerships are removed.
The lower productivity of the unincorporated sector (both sole proprietorships and partnerships) accounted for almost the entire productivity gap between Canada and the United States in 1998. Since then, the productivity of the corporate sector in Canada has fallen relative to that of the corporate sector in the United States and the unincorporated sector no longer accounts for the entire gap.
Release date: 2011-07-28 - Articles and reports: 15-206-X2007008Description:
This study is the third in a series related to the project launched in fall 2003 by the Canadian Productivity Accounts of Statistics Canada in order to compare productivity levels between Canada and the United States. The study's purpose is to examine the comparability of the components of the labour market of these two countries that serve as the sources of the differences in the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita between them. This study can be subdivided into three sections. The first section develops and illustrates the conceptual and methodological framework required to make Canada/United States estimates of labour and population comparable in terms of level. The second section presents revisions and an update to 2005 of the GDP per capita differences and its components, which were presented for the first time in the study by Baldwin, Maynard and Wong (2005), which covered the period from 1994 to 2002, at the time.
Lastly, using the year 2000 as an example, this study tries to quantify the "statistical error" that arises from using inadequate statistics or statistics not designed for this type of international comparison. This exercise reveals that the comparability of data on hours worked per job is especially crucial to identifying the origin of the differences in GDP per capita between labour productivity and hours worked per capita. The worst error involves comparing hours worked estimated from an employer survey with those obtained from a household survey. This type of comparison between Canada and the United States results in assigning an estimated 72% of the difference in GDP per capita to labour productivity when, in reality, it counted for barely 36% in 2000.
Release date: 2007-03-26 - 7. Recent trends in output and employment ArchivedArticles and reports: 11-010-X20070039602Geography: Province or territoryDescription:
The productivity slowdown during 2006 largely originated in the mining and manufacturing industries. The drop in mining was part of a long-term trend, while for manufacturing it was mostly cyclical. Many sectors struggled with labour quality as a result of shortages, especially in western Canada.
Release date: 2007-03-15 - Articles and reports: 11F0027M2005032Geography: CanadaDescription:
Estimates of GDP are sensitive to whether a business expenditure is treated as an investment or an intermediate input. Shifting an expenditure category from intermediate expenditures to investment expenditures increases GDP. While the international guide to measurement (the SNA (93)) recognizes that R&D has certain characteristics that make it more akin to an investment than an intermediate expenditure, it did not recommend that R&D be treated as an investment because of problems in finding a "clear criteria for delineating [R&D] from other activities".
This paper examines whether the use of the OECD Frascati definition is adequate for this purpose. It argues that it is too narrow and that attempts to modify the National Accounts would not be well served by its adoption. In particular, it argues that the appropriate concept of R&D that is required for the Accounts should incorporate a broad range of science-based innovation costs and that this broader R&D concept is amenable to measurement.
Finally, the paper argues that failing to move in the direction of an expanded definition of R&D capital will have consequences for comparisons of Canadian GDP to that of other countries - in particular, our largest trading partner, the United States. It would provide a biased estimate of Canada's GDP relative to the United States. If all science-based innovation expenditures are to be capitalized, GDP will increase. But it appears that Canada's innovation system is directed more towards non-R&D science-based expenditures than the innovation systems of many other countries. If Canada were to only capitalize the narrow Frascati definition of R&D expenditures and not a broader class of science-based innovation expenditures, we would significantly bias estimates of Canadian GDP relative to those for other countries, such as the United States, whose innovation systems concentrate more on traditional R&D expenditures.
Release date: 2005-04-12 - 9. A Comparison of Canadian and U.S. Productivity Levels: An Exploration of Measurement Issues ArchivedArticles and reports: 11F0027M2005028Geography: CanadaDescription:
This paper examines the level of labour productivity in Canada relative to that of the United States in 1999. In doing so, it addresses two main issues. The first is the comparability of the measures of GDP and labour inputs that the statistical agency in each country produces. Second, it investigates how a price index can be constructed to reconcile estimates of Canadian and U.S. GDP per hour worked that are calculated in Canadian and U.S. dollars respectively. After doing so, and taking into account alternative assumptions about Canada/U.S. prices, the paper provides point estimates of Canada's relative labour productivity of the total economy of around 93% that of the United States. The paper points out that at least a 10 percentage point confidence interval should be applied to these estimates. The size of the range is particularly sensitive to assumptions that are made about import and export prices.
Release date: 2005-01-20 - 10. Whatever Happened to Canada-United States Economic Growth and Productivity Performance in the Information Age? ArchivedArticles and reports: 11F0027M2004025Geography: CanadaDescription:
Productivity growth in the U.S. economy jumped during the second half of the 1990s, a resurgence that the literature linked to information technology use. This report contributes to this debate in two ways. First, using the most comparable Canadian and U.S. data available, the contributions of information technology to output, capital input, and productivity performance are quantified. Second, the report examines the extent to which information technology-producing and information technology-using industries have contributed to the aggregate multifactor productivity revival.
Release date: 2004-11-23
Reference (8)
Reference (8) ((8 results))
- Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-206-X2013031Description:
This paper describes the evolution of the Multifactor Productivity Program launched at Statistics Canada in 1987 and the improvements made in multifactor productivity measurement since then. The improvements were made in response to developments in the economic literature, better data sources, and the needs of the user community. The paper also summarizes research that uses alternate data and methodologies to assess the accuracy of the Multifactor Productivity Program and to provide insights into areas that traditional international multifactor productivity programs omit. Finally, the paper outlines future directions that are being contemplated to further improve the measurement of productivity at Statistics Canada.
Release date: 2013-05-28 - Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-206-X2008017Description:
This paper provides an overview of the productivity program at Statistics Canada and a brief description of Canada's productivity performance. The paper defines productivity and the various measures that are used to investigate different aspects of productivity growth. It describes the difference between partial productivity measures (such as labour productivity) and a more complete measure (multifactor productivity) and the advantages and disadvantages of each. The paper explains why productivity is important. It outlines how productivity growth fits into the growth accounting framework and how this framework is used to examine the various sources of economic growth. The paper briefly discusses the challenges that face statisticians in measuring productivity growth. It also provides an overview of Canada's long-term productivity performance and compares Canada to the United States - both in terms of productivity levels and productivity growth rates.
Release date: 2008-02-25 - Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-206-X2007014Description:
The Canadian Productivity Accounts (CPA) of Statistics Canada maintain two multifactor productivity (MFP) programs.
The Major Sector Multifactor Productivity Program develops the indexes of MFP for the total business sector and major industry groups in the business sector.
The Industry Multifactor Productivity Program or the Industry KLEMS Productivity Program develops the industry productivity database that includes MFP indexes, output, capital (K), labour (L), energy (E), materials (M) and services (S) inputs for the individual industries of the business sector at various levels of industry aggregation. This paper describes the methodologies and data sources that are used to construct the major sector MFP indexes and the industry productivity database (or the KLEMS database). More specifically, this paper is meant to:provide a background of the major sector MFP program and the industry KLEMS productivity program;present the methodology for measuring MFP;describe the data sources and data available from the MFP programs;present a quality rating of the industry KLEMS productivity data; anddescribe the research agenda related to the MFP program.
Release date: 2007-12-06 - 4. 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 - 5. Understanding Productivity: A Primer ArchivedSurveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-206-X2006002Description:
This paper provides a concise overview in plain language of the concept of productivity by explaining its relevance and usefulness. This paper is intended for users of the Canadian Productivity Accounts who wish to learn more about productivity concepts, in simple terms.
Release date: 2006-04-21 - 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 - Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-002-MDescription:
This series of articles provides users with an understanding of the notion of productivity and the underlying statistical standards, concepts, and methods used to compile the productivity statistics.
This series enables users to better judge the economic significance, quality and accuracy of the productivity statistics. It is particularly designed for those who regularly use the productivity estimates, such as academics and economic and financial analysts. It is also a reference for others who use the productivity figures less frequently, such as students of economics.
Release date: 2004-12-24
- Date modified: