What are the drivers of total factor productivity in the European Union?

2015 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 406-434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Agnieszka Gehringer ◽  
Inmaculada Martínez-Zarzoso ◽  
Felicitas Nowak-Lehmann Danzinger
Energies ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (12) ◽  
pp. 3429
Author(s):  
Svetlana Balashova ◽  
Apostolos Serletis

This paper uncovers linkages between oil price uncertainty, total factor productivity (TFP) growth, and critical indicators of knowledge production and spillovers. It contributes to the literature by investigating the effects of oil price volatility on TFP growth, controlling for two different channels for TFP growth; benefits from the quality of the national innovation system and from adopting new technologies. We use an unbalanced panel for 28 European Union countries for the period from 1990 to 2018. We find that oil price uncertainty has a negative and statistically significant effect on TFP growth, even after we control for technological advancements and the effects of globalization. We also find that the scale of research and innovation and international trade are positive contributors to TFP growth.


2009 ◽  
Vol 41 (5) ◽  
pp. 1152-1170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto Ezcurra ◽  
Belen Iraizoz ◽  
Pedro Pascual

This paper examines the global trend of total factor productivity, efficiency, and technological change in the European Union regions over the period 1986–2004, using the Malmquist index computed by data envelopment analysis. The results reveal the important role played by technical efficiency in explaining total factor productivity growth in the European Union. For this reason, in a second stage, we investigate existing regional disparities in efficiency levels across the European regions, using a nonparametric methodology that allows us to study the dynamics of the entire cross-sectional distribution. Estimates show the presence of a process of convergence in efficiency levels over the sample period, despite a relatively low degree of intradistribution mobility. In order to complete these results, factors such as the geographical location of the various regions, country-specific characteristics, or the sectoral composition of economic activity were examined for their role in explaining the observed disparities.


2020 ◽  
Vol 240 (5) ◽  
pp. 565-605
Author(s):  
Sebastian Breuer ◽  
Steffen Elstner

AbstractThis paper shows how the German Council of Economic Experts (GCEE) determines Germany’s potential output, and compares the results with those of the European Commission. The approach of the European Commission is a natural benchmark, as it provides the basis for the deficit and debt rules of the European Union. In comparison with the European Commission’s method, the GCEE’s method places greater emphasis on demographic factors in estimating labour input. Additionally, both approaches differ regarding how they estimate the structural unemployment rate and total factor productivity. Finally, this paper discusses the limitations of, and the different options for estimating potential output.


2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 387-406 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jana Hanclova ◽  
Petr Doucek ◽  
Jakub Fischer ◽  
Kristyna Vltavska

The paper examines economic growth in old and new member countries of the European Union (EU-15 and EU-12) during the years of 1994–2000 and 2001–2008 mainly due to changes in information and communication technology (ICT) capital development. The first group EU-15 is presented by old EU countries and the second group EU-12 is presented by new member countries that joined the EU in 2004–2007. The threefactor Cobb-Douglas production function is estimated through the panel general least squares method. The input factors that might influence the economic growth are labour, ICT capital services and non-ICT capital services. Since ICT capital growth data are not available for all selected economies, the groups of countries were reduced to EU-14 and EU-7. The estimated panel production functions confirmed that the average growth of GDP in the EU-7 countries was supported by the stable growth of labour quantity and ICT-capital and increasing total factor productivity. A short-term drop in non-ICT capital growth with follow-up stagnation was caused rather by lower labour productivity. The research discovered that the drop in GDP growth in the EU-14 countries was a result of the slower growth of non-ICT capital and total factor productivity and the stagnated growth of ICT capital with low elasticity, and showed that even the compensation of growth in labour quality did not prevent a decrease in total factor productivity and economic growth.


Author(s):  
Maryla Bieniek-Majka ◽  
Marta Guth

The aim of the article is a comparative assessment of the productivity of horticultural farms, taking into account their economic size, in selected EU countries that specialize in horticultural production, i.e. Greece, Spain, Italy, Poland and Romania. The concentration of production and the associated increase in the economic strength of farms, as well as the multiplicity of entities of different sizes in European Union countries made it necessary to take into account the criterion of economic strength as a factor that allows comparisons between countries. In order to achieve the objective, average factor productivity and profitability of horticultural holdings from the EU FADN database in 2008-2018 were examined in static and dynamic terms through the average annual rate of change. The conducted research confirmed that with an increase in the economic size of farms, on average, their efficiency increases, and the production of fruits and vegetables in the studied period was profitable in all countries and economic size groups. The highest land productivity was achieved by Italian farms, the lowest by horticultural farms from Romania. The highest asset productivity was recorded in Spain and slightly lower in Poland, and the lowest in Italy and Romania. The highest labour productivity was in Spanish and Polish agricultural holdings, and the lowest in Italian agricultural holdings. These results were translated into profitability of production, which was the highest in Spanish farms and the lowest in Italian farms. Sales were unprofitable only in Italian and Romanian agricultural holdings.


2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kladiola Gjini

Abstract One of the most important topics in empirical trade research is the link between productivity and trade liberalization. In this paper we will focus on the effect of MFN tariffs in the total factor productivity of Croatian firms over the period 2003-2012. This period is characterized by an increased openness toward European Union for Croatian firms. The aim of this paper is to present evidence on the negative link between productivity and tariffs by using the Levinsohn and Petrin (2003) method to estimate productivity of firms. Then we will use TFP as a dependent variable for firm characteristics and trade policy indicator (MFN tariffs). The results are in line with most other studies, confirming the negative relationship between TFP and tariffs. The results show that exporting firms have a higher productivity than non-exporting. We also conclude that up to a certain age productivity increases and then decreases.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document