Integrated industry-level production account for the United States sources of the ongoing U.S. recovery.
Rosenthal, Steven ; Russell, Matthew ; Samuels, Jon D. 等
ECONOMIC GROWTH in the United States since 1995 has been
characterized as containing several unique periods: the information
technology (IT) investment boom in 1995-2000, the period of jobless
growth over 2000-2005, and the Great Recession and Recovery period that
began around 2007 and continues through today. (1) At the same time,
ongoing structural trends that predate these periods have continued and
remain a focal point for both economists and policymakers: increasing
globalization of the marketplace, the ongoing spread of information and
communications technology, and the continued effect of the skills gap on
the U.S. labor market.
The ongoing changes to the U.S. economy have reinforced the need
for an up-to-date decomposition of gross domestic product (GDP) to the
industry-level sources of growth. This decomposition is important not
only for analyzing historical growth and identifying industry
contributions but also for evaluating the prospects for growth as the
economy continues to recover from the financial crisis. For example,
Jorgenson, Ho, and Samuels (2014) argue that due to IT, it is important
to consider industry-specific sources of growth and to incorporate
industry-specific analysis into aggregate projections of labor
productivity and GDP growth.
In this Research Spotlight, we present a new industry-level data
set for 1998-2012 that is useful for analyzing the underlying trends in
aggregate economic growth. (2) The data set combines industry-level
output and intermediate inputs from the GDP by industry accounts of the
Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) with information on capital and labor
inputs from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Productivity Program to
form an internally consistent industry-level production account. This
account is consistent with the aggregate GDP estimates published with
the 2013 comprehensive revision of the national income and product
accounts (NIPAs) and the January 2014 comprehensive revision of the
industry economic accounts. (3)
One of the most important features of this data set and analysis is
that industry-level spending on intellectual property products--for
example, research and development (R&D)--is included as an
investment good. (4) Since the seminal contributions of Griliches (1979)
and Romer (1994) economists have been stolidly focused on quantifying
the role of R&D in economic growth and productivity. By treating
R&D as an investment that yields a flow of capital services over
time, the contribution of intellectual property products to growth and
productivity can be analyzed using the same framework as other capital
goods.
The following is a summary of the results:
* R&D capital input contributed about 0.09 percentage point to
aggregate value-added growth between 1998 and 2012, about half as much
as software.
* The incorporation of R&D as capital input reduces estimated
aggregate multifactor productivity (MFP) growth from an average of 0.56
percentage point each year in 1998-2012 to 0.47 percentage point each
year.
* The smaller contribution of both tangible- and intangible-capital
input relative to the pre-recession period more than accounts for the
slower growth during the recovery.
The remainder of the article consists of an overview of the
estimation framework, estimates of the sources of industry growth over
the period 1998-2012, and results of an industry decomposition of
aggregate growth and productivity. In the last section, the conclusions
and next steps are presented.
Overview of the Framework
We use a growth-accounting framework to analyze the sources of
growth across industries. The implementation of this framework requires
data on outputs produced by industry, the prices received by the
producer for these outputs, and the prices and quantities of
intermediate and value-added inputs used in production by industry.
Because an objective of this analysis is to produce estimates that are
consistent with the NIPAs and the GDP by Industry accounts, the
industry-level production account maintains the definitional and
conceptual framework of the BEA economic accounts.
The industry-level production account and MFP measures presented
here reflect output consistent with GDP for the U.S. economy, but they
differ in concepts and coverage from the official BLS measures of MFP.
For example, the use of a gross output concept for measuring MFP in this
project contrasts with the sectoral industry output approach used in the
BLS MFP measures for major sectors and industries. (5)
Specific industries are the fundamental economic entities in this
analysis. (6) The economy is divided into 63 industries, each of which
produces output using capital and labor inputs, intermediate inputs, and
the available level of production technology. It is noteworthy that each
of these major input groups at the industry level is, in fact, made up
of many heterogeneous inputs, each with its own price and quantity
index. For example, under intermediate input, there are all of the
detailed commodities that are published in the bench mark input-output
account. Intermediate inputs include items such as energy, materials,
and purchased business services. Capital input includes estimates for
approximately 90 assets within the categories of fixed business
equipment, structures, inventories, land, and intellectual property
products. Labor input is cross classified by gender, age, education, and
class of worker.
Productivity is a measure of how efficiently inputs are converted
to output. In the industry-level production account, outputs and inputs
are measured in constant units exclusive of inflation and adjusted for
compositional changes over time.
Using the growth-accounting framework, industry output growth is
expressed as the sum of the share-weighted growth rate of industry
inputs and the change in MFP. Within this framework, MFP growth measures
embed underlying changes in the true economic technology, innovation,
changes in production management as well as the effects of inputs that
are not properly measured or that are unmeasured. For example, before
the 2013 comprehensive revision of the NIPAs, spending on R&D was
not measured as investment that could produce future capital services.
Therefore R&D was missing as a capital input. The set of accounts
presented in this article includes R&D spending as a capital input.
Sources of Industry Growth
The comprehensive results from the industry-level production
account are presented in "Table 1. Sources of Industry Output
Growth, 1998-2012." The results in table 1 demonstrate the
heterogeneity in industry growth and its sources for that period. For
example, the support activities for mining industry grew by about 7.2
percent each year on average over the period (consistent with the
expansion of fracking), mostly because of an expansion of labor input
and MFP growth. The data processing, internet publishing, and other
information services industry grew by a little over 8 percent each year
as a result of capital investments and purchases of intermediate inputs
that are consistent with anecdotal evidence of shifts to cloud
computing. In contrast, the apparel industry shrank by about 10 percent
each year over the period, which is consistent with increased purchases
of apparel produced abroad, but it became slightly more productive in
terms of MFP growth; growth in textile mills was similar. The motor
vehicle industry grew by about 0.7 percent over the period; the growth
was mostly driven by MFP growth because declines in labor input dampened
growth by about 0.4 percent each year.
The contribution of MFP growth to industry output varied
considerably by industry (chart 1 on page 8). In 1998-2012, the largest
growth in MFP occurred in computer and electronic products, support
activities for mining, water transportation, computer systems design and
related services, and pipeline transportation. These productivity gains
reflect ongoing innovation in IT and innovative practices in the mining
and transportation industries. In contrast, productivity growth in
rental and leasing, management of companies, legal services, and other
services was negative over the same period. Negative measured MFP
reflects decreased capability to manage resources and decisions to hoard
inputs in uncertain times, but it also indicates potential issues in the
measurement of outputs and inputs, including but not limited to quality.
This integrated production account is useful for analyzing the
economic changes at the industry level that occurred during the time of
the Great Recession and that are taking place during the ongoing
recovery. In our analysis, the sample period was split into three
periods: 1998-2007, 2007-2009, and 2009-2012. According to the National
Bureau of Economic Research Business Cycle Dating Committee, the
recession began in December 2007; however, because annual GDP growth was
relatively strong during 2007, this year was included in the
prerecession period of 1998-2007. The recession period covers growth
between 2007 and 2009, and the recovery period covers growth between
2009 and 2012. (7)
To analyze how the ongoing recovery compares with the prerecession
period, differences in industry output growth and its sources are
compared for the period 2009-2012 and 1998-2007 (chart 2 on page 9). Of
the 63 industries that are analyzed, 34 industries grew faster during
the ongoing recovery period than during the prerecession period, even
though GDP growth was slower during the recovery period. The largest
relative differences occurred in apparel and leather products, motor
vehicles, primary metals, machinery, oil and gas extraction, and support
activities for mining. For each of these industries, the sources of
growth was mostly attributable to labor input, intermediate input, and
MFP growth; the contribution of capital does not show much difference
compared with the earlier period. The industries with the slowest output
growth relative to the early period were securities, credit
intermediation, social assistance, construction, and farms. This slower
growth was due to slower accumulation of inputs and MFP growth in all
these industries, except for construction, which had higher MFP growth
in comparison to the prerecession period, and farms, which had a small
increase in capital. Overall, for the industries that grew faster during
the recovery period of 2009-2012 relative to 1998-2007, the largest
source of increased output growth was increased intermediate growth,
followed by MFP growth, labor input growth, and then capital input
growth. For those industries that declined during the recovery period
relative to the precession in intermediate input, followed by capital
input, MFP growth, and labor input. These results indicate that the
ongoing recovery has not reverted the depth and breadth of the
recession.
Decomposition of GDP Growth
GDP growth is decomposed to its sources across industries and
factors of production using the direct aggregation of industry approach
(Jorgenson, Ho, Samuels, and Stiroh 2007). With this approach, aggregate
value-added growth is the share-weighted growth of industry value-added
growth. The contribution of primary, or value-added, input growth by
industry to aggregate value-added growth is the Domar-weighted input
contribution, and the contribution of industry MFP to aggregate MFP is
the Domar-weighted industry MFP growth rate. (8)
Between 1998 and 2012, the majority of aggregate value-added growth
was due to the accumulation of inputs. Of the 2.01 percent average
annual growth in value added, 1.18 percentage points were accounted for
by capital (about 60 percent of growth), 0.36 percentage point by labor
(18 percent), and 0.47 percentage point by MFP growth (22 percent)
(table 2).
Within capital, about 40 percent of the capital contribution was
due to IT equipment and software (0.49 percentage point), and about 8
percent was due to R&D capital (0.09 percentage point). The 0.09
percentage point contribution of R&D capital to aggregate
value-added growth each year provides a measure of the bias of
previously published estimates. If this contribution of capital was
excluded, estimated MFP growth would have been higher by about 0.09
percentage point each year; that is, aggregate MFP growth would have
been 0.56 percentage point each year instead of 0.47 percentage point.
Within labor input, the contribution from workers without a college
degree actually fell over the period.
The difference in GDP growth in 2009-2012 relative to the GDP
growth in 1998-2007 was more than accounted for by the difference in the
contribution of capital (table 2). Comparing the growth during the
recovery period of 2009-2012 with the growth in 1998-2007 period, GDP
grew slower, by 0.67 percent age point each year. Capital input, in
particular, contributed 1.16 percentage points less to growth during
2009-2012 than during 1998-2007. This smaller contribution was split
between IT-capital, which accounted for 0.31 percentage point, software
capital which accounted for 0.17 percentage point, and Other capital
which accounted for 0.66 percentage point.
Interestingly, all of the increase in the contribution of labor
input during the recovery period was due to the increased contribution
of workers without a college degree, reversing the decline in the
contribution of noncollege workers that took place beginning in the late
1990s.
In an examination of structural changes at the industry level for
22 major industry groups at the two-digit NAICS-based level of detail,
finance and insurance accounted for about 42 percent (0.28 percentage
point) of the slower U.S. economic growth during 2009-2012, compared
with 1998-2007 (table 3). Capital input accounted for the majority of
this slowdown.
State and local government accounted for about 29 percent (0.19
percentage point) of the slower growth, mainly as a result of decreased
labor input, and nondurable-goods manufacturing accounted for about 27
percent (0.18 percentage point) as a result of MFP.
In contrast, mining, management of companies, and durable-goods
manufacturing exhibited stronger growth during the recovery period
relative to the prerecession period. Mining contributed 0.12 percentage
point more to growth during 2009-2012, relative to 1998-2007, mainly as
a result of gains in MFP but also as a result of stronger contributions
of labor and capital input. Management of companies was also led by
stronger relative growth in MFP, while durable goods stronger relative
growth was more than accounted for by stronger relative growth in labor
input.
The framework and data permits an analysis of the industry sources
of the aggregate sources of growth. Chart 3 (on page 10) shows the
difference in industry contributions to aggregate value-added growth
during the recovery period of 2009-2012 relative to the pre-recession
period of 1998-2007, and provides detail on the results from tables 2
and 3. As noted, aggregate value-added growth has been slower during the
recovery period, but this is not the case for all industries. For
example, motor vehicles, management of companies, machinery, utilities,
oil and gas, and computer systems design are all growing more rapidly
during the recovery period than during the prerecession period, as would
be expected of most industries during a recovery from a cyclical
downturn. Yet all industries are not recovering relative to 1998-2007.
State and local governments, computers and electronic products,
broadcasting and telecom, and credit intermediation are all growing
significantly less rapidly than during the prerecession period.
To understand the sources of slower aggregate value-added growth
during the recovery period, charts 4-6 show the differences in industry
contributions to aggregate capital, labor, and MFP in 2009-2012 and in
1998-2007. With respect to industry contribution to aggregate capital
input, relative to the prerecession period, the contribution of capital
input was significantly lower in real estate, credit intermediation,
retail trade, rental and leasing, wholesale trade, and construction
(chart 4 on page 11). In addition, the small increase in the aggregate
contribution of labor input during 2009-2012 compared with the
contribution in 19982007 was spread broadly across a subset of
industries, including computer and electronic products, machinery,
administrative support services, fabricated metals, and motor vehicles
(chart 5 on page 12). In each of these industries, the contribution of
noncollege workers outpaced that in the 1998-2007 period. Lastly, MFP
accelerated over the recovery period relative to the prerecession
period, with the strongest gains exhibited by real estate, construction,
and motor vehicles, while computer and electronic products, petroleum
and coal products, and broadcasting and telecom experienced the sharpest
relative decrease in contribution (chart 6 on page 13).
Conclusions and Next Steps
During the ongoing recovery from the financial crisis and Great
Recession, U.S. growth continues to be sluggish, compared with the
period immediately before the recession. At the aggregate level, this
analysis attributes the majority of this sluggishness to a decrease in
the contribution of capital services. At the industry level, stronger
value-added growth in motor vehicles, management of companies, machinery
and utilities is offset by slower growth in state and local government,
computer and electronic products, broadcasting, credit intermediation,
and real estate. The large decline in capital services relative to
1998-2007 was driven mainly by real estate, credit intermediation,
retail trade and wholesale trade.
The purpose of this paper is to lay out a framework for a set of
industry-level production accounts that are consistent with GDP and to
provide industry detail to analyze the sources of growth. The current
update includes an expansion of the scope of the accounts to include
investments in R&D and entertainment originals as capital. For the
1998-2012 period, R&D capital input accounted for about 0.09
percentage point of aggregate growth, about half as much as software
capital. Entertainment originals capital input accounted for about 0.03
percentage point. Thus, incorporating R&D lowered MFP growth
estimates from about 0.56 percentage point each year to about 0.47
percentage point.
This analysis is limited by the time series availability of the
industry-level production account. Future work on the integrated BEA-BLS
industry level production account includes investigating approaches to
extend the account backwards in time following Jorgenson, Ho, and
Samuels (2014) and improving estimates of labor composition by
incorporating results from the American Community Survey. In any case,
the groundwork for future updates to the industry-level production
accounts is now in place, and work is under way to plan for these future
updates.
[GRAPHIC 1 OMITTED]
[GRAPHIC 2 OMITTED]
[GRAPHIC 3 OMITTED]
[GRAPHIC 4 OMITTED]
[GRAPHIC 5 OMITTED]
[GRAPHIC 6 OMITTED]
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank Matt Calby, Thomas F. Howells III, and
Amanda Lyndaker of the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) and Mark Dumas
and Randy Kinoshita of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) for their
work on the data. We also thank Carol Moylan of BEA and John Ruser of
BLS for their support on this project, and seminar participants at the
World KLEMS conference for useful questions and comments. The views
expressed in this paper are solely those of the authors and not
necessarily those of BEA or BLS.
References
Fleck, Susan, Steven Rosenthal, Matthew Russell, Erich H.
Strassner, and Lisa Usher. 2014. "Conceptual and measurement
challenges," in "A Prototype BEA/BLS Industry-Level Production
Account for the United States." In Measuring Economic
Sustainability and Progress, edited by Dale W. Jorgenson, J. Steven
Landefeld, and Paul Schreyer. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, for
the National Bureau of Economic Research (forthcoming).
Griliches, Zvi. 1979. "Issues in Assessing the Contribution of
Research and Development to Productivity Growth." Bell Journal of
Economics 10, no. 1 (Spring): 92-116.
Jorgenson, Dale W., Mun S. Ho, and Jon D. Samuels. 2014.
"Long-Term Estimates of U.S. Productivity and Growth." Paper
prepared for the Third World KLEMS Conference. Tokyo, Japan, May 19-20,
2014; www.worldklems.net/conferences/worldklems2014/
worldklems2014_Ho.pdf
Jorgenson, Dale W., Mun S. Ho, and Jon D. Samuels. 2014. "What
Will Revive U.S. Economic Growth? Lessons from a Prototype
Industry-Level Production Account." Journal of Policy Modeling 36,
no. 4 (July-August): 674-691.
Jorgenson, Dale W., Mun S. Ho, and Jon D. Samuels, and Kevin J.
Stiroh. 2007. "The Industry Origins of the American Productivity
Resurgence." Economic Systems Research 19, no. 3 (October):
229-252.
Romer, Paul M. 1994. "The Origins of Endogenous Growth."
Journal of Economic Perspectives 8, no. 1 (Winter): 3-22.
(1.) Jorgenson, Ho, and Samuels (2014).
(2.) The paper and the data set are available on BEA's Web
site at www.bea.gov/industry/index.htm#integrated. This paper was
prepared for the Third World KLEMS Conference, Tokyo, Japan, May 19-20,
2014. For more information, see www.worldklems.net/conferences.htm.
(3.) This industry-level production account is somewhat broader in
scope than official GDP. It treats government capital symmetrically with
private sector capital input. In particular, in addition to the
depreciation cost, there is also a rate of return on government capital
assets.
(4.) The data set presented in this paper is an update of estimates
presented in Fleck, Rosenthal, Russell, Strassner, and Usher (2014). The
incorporation of investment in R&D and in entertainment, artistic
and literary originals expanded the boundary of U.S. GDP and its related
measures. R&D capital includes both own-account investment and the
R&D produced by industry that is sold to others. Investment in
entertainment, artistic and literary originals only includes
own-account.
(5.) For more details, see "Conceptual and measurement
challenges" in Fleck, Rosenthal, Russell, Strassner, and Usher
(2014).
(6.) The account is prepared on a 2007 North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) basis and is published at about the
three-digit NAICS level of detail.
(7.) The unemployment rate peaked in October 2009. However, the
Business Cycle Dating Committee recorded the end of the recession in the
United States as June 2009; www.nber.org/cycles/recessions_faq.html
period, the largest source, on average, was the decline
(8.) Each industry's Domar weight is the ratio of the
industry's current-dollar gross output to aggregate current-dollar
value added. The industry's contribution to aggregate MFP growth is
the industry's MFP growth multiplied by its Domar weight. The
contribution of industry intermediate input use drops out in the
calculation of aggregate value added and its decomposition.
Steven Rosenthal is an economist in the Office of Productivity and
Technology at the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Matthew Russell, Jon D.
Samuels, and Erich H. Strassner are economists in the Industry Economic
Accounts Directorate at the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Lisa Usher is a
retired economist from the Office of Productivity and Technology.
Table 1. Sources of Industry Output Growth, 1998-2012
[Average annual growth rates]
Growth Contributions
Output Capital Labor
Farms 0.51 0.18 -0.08
Forestry, fishing, and
related activities -0.20 0.36 0.49
Oil and gas extraction 1.81 -0.16 0.16
Mining, except oil and gas -0.17 0.35 -0.13
Support activities
for mining 7.18 0.37 2.34
Utilities -0.36 0.57 -0.09
Construction -1.44 0.30 -0.11
Wood products -2.10 0.00 -0.90
Nonmetallic mineral products -1.94 0.17 -0.51
Primary metals 0.39 -0.09 -0.58
Fabricated metal products -0.31 0.06 -0.31
Machinery 0.57 0.16 -0.47
Computer and electronic products 4.05 0.41 -0.82
Electrical equipment,
appliances, and
components -1.83 -0.06 -0.62
Motor vehicles, bodies
and trailers, and
parts 0.67 0.06 -0.44
Other transportation equipment 1.26 0.11 -0.16
Furniture and related products -2.60 0.12 -1.21
Miscellaneous manufacturing 1.62 0.43 -0.33
Food and beverage and
tobacco products 0.17 0.16 0.01
Textile mills and textile
product mills -5.25 -0.20 -1.55
Apparel and leather and
allied products -9.99 -0.09 -2.80
Paper products -1.73 -0.18 -0.60
Printing and related
support activities -2.49 -0.02 -1.40
Petroleum and coal products 0.77 0.09 -0.02
Chemical products 0.45 1.12 -0.15
Plastics and rubber products -0.95 0.13 -0.43
Wholesale trade 2.43 0.96 0.13
Retail trade 2.10 0.94 0.13
Air transportation -1.74 0.03 -0.38
Rail transportation 1.21 0.13 -0.40
Water transportation 3.17 -0.21 0.21
Truck transportation 0.85 0.36 -0.10
Transit and ground passenger
transportation 1.15 0.39 0.52
Pipeline transportation -2.13 1.17 -0.16
Other transportation and support
activities 1.67 0.01 0.08
Warehousing and storage 6.58 0.49 1.25
Publishing industries,
except internet
(includes software) 1.35 1.28 -0.27
Motion picture and
sound recording
industries 1.12 1.15 0.22
Broadcasting
and telecommunications 4.38 1.69 -0.24
Data processing, internet
publishing, and
other information services 8.36 3.16 -0.48
Federal Reserve banks, credit
intermediation, and
related activities 1.46 1.11 0.34
Securities, commodity
contracts, and
investments 4.11 0.18 0.45
Insurance carriers and
related activities 3.40 1.08 0.26
Funds, trusts, and other
financial vehicles 2.56 0.96 0.19
Real estate 2.52 1.42 0.05
Rental and leasing
services and lessors
of intangible assets 2.06 2.37 -0.10
Legal services -0.02 1.00 0.30
Computer systems design
and related
services 4.98 0.19 1.86
Miscellaneous
professional, scientific,
and technical services 2.58 0.87 0.88
Management of companies and
enterprises 2.83 1.07 1.11
Administrative and
support services 2.23 0.75 0.59
Waste management
and remediation
services 1.47 0.19 0.44
Educational services 3.29 0.22 1.74
Ambulatory health care services 3.19 0.22 1.54
Hospitals and Nursing
and residential
care 3.02 0.27 1.13
Social assistance 3.52 0.11 1.49
Performing arts,
spectator sports,
museums, and related
activities 2.63 0.14 0.31
Amusements, gambling,
and recreation
industries 2.13 0.69 0.56
Accommodation 0.82 0.95 -0.10
Food services and drinking places 1.73 0.00 0.55
Other services, except government 0.00 0.46 0.11
Federal government 2.28 0.71 0.01
State and local government 1.65 0.52 0.62
Contributions Growth
Intermediate Multi-factor
productivity
Farms -0.66 1.07
Forestry, fishing, and
related activities -1.92 0.87
Oil and gas extraction 0.53 1.28
Mining, except oil and gas -0.68 0.28
Support activities
for mining 0.96 3.51
Utilities -1.19 0.35
Construction -0.60 -1.03
Wood products -2.02 0.83
Nonmetallic mineral products -1.19 -0.41
Primary metals 0.24 0.82
Fabricated metal products -0.07 0.02
Machinery 0.33 0.56
Computer and electronic products -2.01 6.47
Electrical equipment,
appliances, and
components -2.05 0.90
Motor vehicles, bodies
and trailers, and
parts 0.00 1.06
Other transportation equipment 0.60 0.72
Furniture and related products -1.44 -0.06
Miscellaneous manufacturing 0.34 1.19
Food and beverage and
tobacco products -0.07 0.07
Textile mills and textile
product mills -3.70 0.20
Apparel and leather and
allied products -8.10 0.99
Paper products -0.87 -0.08
Printing and related
support activities -2.58 1.50
Petroleum and coal products 0.59 0.11
Chemical products -0.38 -0.14
Plastics and rubber products -0.76 0.11
Wholesale trade 1.08 0.26
Retail trade 1.17 -0.14
Air transportation -1.18 -0.22
Rail transportation 1.00 0.48
Water transportation 0.63 2.54
Truck transportation 0.30 0.29
Transit and ground passenger
transportation 0.57 -0.34
Pipeline transportation -5.46 2.33
Other transportation and support
activities 1.25 0.33
Warehousing and storage 3.69 1.15
Publishing industries,
except internet
(includes software) -0.30 0.64
Motion picture and
sound recording
industries -1.77 1.51
Broadcasting
and telecommunications 1.64 1.30
Data processing, internet
publishing, and
other information services 4.97 0.70
Federal Reserve banks, credit
intermediation, and
related activities -0.27 0.29
Securities, commodity
contracts, and
investments 2.43 1.05
Insurance carriers and
related activities 2.08 -0.02
Funds, trusts, and other
financial vehicles 1.12 0.29
Real estate 0.60 0.44
Rental and leasing
services and lessors
of intangible assets 1.32 -1.54
Legal services 0.02 -1.35
Computer systems design
and related
services 0.57 2.36
Miscellaneous
professional, scientific,
and technical services 1.04 -0.21
Management of companies and
enterprises 2.13 -1.47
Administrative and
support services 0.21 0.68
Waste management
and remediation
services 0.41 0.44
Educational services 1.75 -0.43
Ambulatory health care services 1.11 0.32
Hospitals and Nursing
and residential
care 1.85 -0.23
Social assistance 1.99 -0.08
Performing arts,
spectator sports,
museums, and related
activities 1.38 0.80
Amusements, gambling,
and recreation
industries 1.12 -0.25
Accommodation 0.11 -0.14
Food services and drinking places 0.88 0.30
Other services, except government 0.78 -1.35
Federal government 1.44 0.12
State and local government 0.43 0.08
NOTE. A contribution is a share-weighted growth rate.
Table 2. Growth in Aggregate Value Added and
the Sources of Growth
[Average annual growth rates]
1998-2012 1998-2007 2007-2012
Value added 2.01 2.78 0.62
Capital input 1.18 1.55 0.52
Information
technology capital 0.31 0.40 0.14
R&D capital 0.09 0.09 0.09
Software capital 0.18 0.23 0.08
Entertainment 0.03 0.03 0.02
originals capital
Other capital 0.59 0.80 0.19
Labor input 0.36 0.60 -0.09
College labor 0.52 0.63 0.34
Noncollege labor -0.16 -0.02 -0.42
Multifactor productivity 0.47 0.62 0.18
2007-2009 2009-2012 2009-2012
less
1998-2007
Value added -1.62 2.11 -0.67
Capital input 0.71 0.40 -1.16
Information
technology capital 0.20 0.10 -0.31
R&D capital 0.10 0.08 -0.01
Software capital 0.10 0.06 -0.17
Entertainment 0.02 0.02 -0.01
originals capital
Other capital 0.28 0.14 -0.66
Labor input -1.31 0.73 0.13
College labor -0.11 0.63 0.00
Noncollege labor -1.21 0.10 0.12
Multifactor productivity -1.02 0.99 0.36
NOTES. Aggregate value-added growth is the sum of the share-weighed
industry value-added growth. The contribution of
capital, labor, and total factor productivity is the domar-weighted
industry contributions. Information technology
capital is computer, communications and other information
technology capital.
Table 3. Contributions to Aggregate Value-Added Growth
[Percentage points]
1998-2012
Multi-
Value factor
added Capital Labor productivity
Total economy 2.01 1.18 0.36 0.47
Agriculture, forestry,
fishing, and hunting 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.02
Mining 0.07 0.00 0.01 0.05
Utilities 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00
Construction -0.07 0.03 0.00 -0.09
Durable goods 0.25 0.03 -0.10 0.31
Nondurable goods 0.01 0.06 -0.05 0.00
Wholesale trade 0.11 0.08 0.01 0.02
Retail Trade 0.09 0.09 0.01 -0.01
Transportation
and warehousing 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.02
Information 0.21 0.14 -0.02 0.09
Finance and insurance 0.20 0.12 0.04 0.04
Real estate and rental
and leasing 0.30 0.26 0.01 0.04
Professional, scientific,
and technical services 0.17 0.08 0.09 0.00
Management of companies
and enterprises 0.02 0.03 0.03 -0.04
Administrative and waste
management services 0.08 0.03 0.02 0.03
Educational services 0.02 0.00 0.03 -0.01
Health care and
social assistance 0.16 0.02 0.14 0.00
Arts, entertainment,
and recreation 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.00
Accommodation and
food services 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.01
Other services,
except government -0.03 0.02 0.00 -0.05
Federal government 0.07 0.06 0.00 0.01
State and local government 0.20 0.09 0.10 0.01
Addenda:
Private economy components:
Information technology-
producing Industries 0.31 0.04 0.00 0.27
Information technology-
using Industries 0.98 0.59 0.30 0.09
Noninformation technology
industries 0.46 0.41 -0.04 0.09
1998-2007
Multi-
Value factor
added Capital Labor productivity
Total economy 2.78 1.55 0.60 0.63
Agriculture, forestry,
fishing, and hunting 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.02
Mining 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.01
Utilities 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00
Construction 0.00 0.05 0.09 -0.14
Durable goods 0.36 0.05 -0.11 0.43
Nondurable goods 0.09 0.06 -0.05 0.09
Wholesale trade 0.22 0.12 0.03 0.08
Retail Trade 0.15 0.12 0.02 0.00
Transportation
and warehousing 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.02
Information 0.28 0.17 -0.01 0.12
Finance and insurance 0.31 0.18 0.07 0.05
Real estate and rental
and leasing 0.37 0.39 0.02 -0.03
Professional, scientific,
and technical services 0.20 0.10 0.11 -0.02
Management of companies
and enterprises 0.01 0.03 0.03 -0.04
Administrative and waste
management services 0.11 0.04 0.04 0.03
Educational services 0.02 0.00 0.03 -0.01
Health care and
social assistance 0.17 0.02 0.14 0.00
Arts, entertainment,
and recreation 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.00
Accommodation and
food services 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.03
Other services,
except government -0.02 0.02 0.01 -0.06
Federal government 0.06 0.05 -0.01 0.02
State and local government 0.26 0.10 0.14 0.03
Addenda:
Private economy components:
Information technology-
producing Industries 0.37 0.05 -0.02 0.34
Information technology-
using Industries 1.40 0.80 0.42 0.18
Noninformation technology
industries 0.69 0.56 0.07 0.06
2009-2012
Multi-
Value factor
added Capital Labor productivity
Total economy 2.11 0.40 0.73 0.98
Agriculture, forestry,
fishing, and hunting -0.01 0.02 0.00 -0.03
Mining 0.14 0.02 0.04 0.08
Utilities 0.07 0.01 -0.01 0.07
Construction -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 0.02
Durable goods 0.44 0.01 0.09 0.35
Nondurable goods -0.09 0.05 0.01 -0.15
Wholesale trade 0.13 0.04 0.04 0.05
Retail Trade 0.08 0.02 0.05 0.01
Transportation
and warehousing 0.09 0.00 0.05 0.05
Information 0.16 0.09 0.00 0.06
Finance and insurance 0.03 -0.02 0.06 -0.01
Real estate and rental
and leasing 0.28 -0.01 0.00 0.29
Professional, scientific,
and technical services 0.20 0.00 0.10 0.10
Management of companies
and enterprises 0.11 0.02 0.04 0.05
Administrative and waste
management services 0.12 0.01 0.08 0.02
Educational services 0.01 0.00 0.02 -0.01
Health care and
social assistance 0.10 0.02 0.15 -0.07
Arts, entertainment,
and recreation 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.02
Accommodation and
food services 0.09 0.00 0.04 0.05
Other services,
except government 0.00 0.00 0.01 -0.01
Federal government 0.07 0.06 0.00 0.01
State and local government 0.07 0.06 -0.02 0.03
Addenda:
Private economy components:
Information technology-
producing Industries 0.24 0.03 0.07 0.14
Information technology-
using Industries 0.94 0.19 0.53 0.23
Noninformation technology
industries 0.79 0.06 0.15 0.57
2009-2012 less 1998-2007
Multi-
Value factor
added Capital Labor productivity
Total economy -0.67 -1.16 0.13 0.36
Agriculture, forestry,
fishing, and hunting -0.04 0.01 0.00 -0.05
Mining 0.12 0.02 0.03 0.07
Utilities 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.07
Construction -0.02 -0.07 -0.11 0.16
Durable goods 0.08 -0.04 0.20 -0.08
Nondurable goods -0.18 0.00 0.06 -0.24
Wholesale trade -0.09 -0.07 0.01 -0.03
Retail Trade -0.07 -0.10 0.02 0.01
Transportation
and warehousing 0.04 -0.02 0.04 0.02
Information -0.12 -0.07 0.01 -0.06
Finance and insurance -0.28 -0.20 -0.02 -0.07
Real estate and rental
and leasing -0.10 -0.40 -0.02 0.33
Professional, scientific,
and technical services 0.00 -0.10 -0.01 0.12
Management of companies
and enterprises 0.11 0.00 0.01 0.09
Administrative and waste
management services 0.01 -0.03 0.04 0.00
Educational services -0.02 0.00 -0.01 -0.01
Health care and
social assistance -0.06 0.00 0.01 -0.07
Arts, entertainment,
and recreation 0.01 -0.01 0.00 0.02
Accommodation and
food services 0.03 -0.01 0.02 0.02
Other services,
except government 0.02 -0.02 -0.01 0.04
Federal government 0.01 0.01 0.01 -0.01
State and local government -0.19 -0.04 -0.16 0.01
Addenda:
Private economy components:
Information technology-
producing Industries -0.13 -0.02 0.08 -0.20
Information technology-
using Industries -0.46 -0.61 0.11 0.05
Noninformation technology
industries 0.10 -0.50 0.09 0.51
Notes. A contribution is a share-weighted growth rate. The
information technology classification is from Jorgenson, Ho,
and Samuels (2014).