Productivity accounts

Key indicators

Changing any selection will automatically update the page content.

Selected geographical area: Canada

Selected geographical area: Newfoundland and Labrador

Selected geographical area: Prince Edward Island

Selected geographical area: Nova Scotia

Selected geographical area: New Brunswick

Selected geographical area: Quebec

Selected geographical area: Ontario

Selected geographical area: Manitoba

Selected geographical area: Saskatchewan

Selected geographical area: Alberta

Selected geographical area: British Columbia

Selected geographical area: Yukon

Selected geographical area: Northwest Territories

Selected geographical area: Nunavut

Sort Help
entries

Results

All (162)

All (162) (10 to 20 of 162 results)

Data (26)

Data (26) (0 to 10 of 26 results)

Analysis (112)

Analysis (112) (0 to 10 of 112 results)

Reference (24)

Reference (24) (0 to 10 of 24 results)

  • Notices and consultations: 13-605-X
    Description:

    This product contains articles related to the latest methodological, conceptual developments in the Canadian System of Macroeconomic Accounts as well as the analysis of the Canadian economy. It includes articles detailing new methods, concepts and statistical techniques used to compile the Canadian System of Macroeconomic Accounts. It also includes information related to new or expanded data products, provides updates and supplements to information found in various guides and analytical articles touching upon a broad range of topics related to the Canadian economy.

    Release date: 2019-12-02

  • Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-206-X2013031
    Description:

    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: 13-605-X201200311728
    Description:

    This report highlights the revisions to the quarterly estimates of labour productivity and associated variables in the business sector resulting from the historical revision of the national gross domestic product by income and by expenditure accounts (NIEA) released on October 1st, 2012.

    Release date: 2012-10-12

  • Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-206-X2010027
    Description:

    Measures of productivity are derived by comparing outputs and inputs. The System of National Accounts (SNA) in Canada provides a useful framework for organizing the information required for comparisons of this type. Integrated systems of economic accounts provide coherent, consistent alternate estimates of the various concepts that can be used to measure productivity.

    Release date: 2010-06-29

  • Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-206-X2008018
    Description:

    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-X2008017
    Description:

    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-X2007014
    Description:

    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

  • Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-206-X2007012
    Description:

    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

  • Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-206-X2007009
    Description:

    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

  • Surveys and statistical programs – Documentation: 15-206-X2007005
    Description:

    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
Date modified: