A tractable means of correcting sector level TFP calculations in the face of biased technological change.

The measurement of the impact of technical change has received significant attention within the economics literature. One popular method of quantifying the impact of technical change is the use of growth accounting index numbers. However, in a recent article Nelson and Pack (1999) criticise the use of such index numbers in situations where technical change is likely to be biased in favour of one or other inputs. In particular they criticise the common approach of applying observed cost shares, as proxies for partial output elasticities, to weight the change in quantities which they claim is only valid under Hicks neutrality. Recent advances in the measurement of product and factor biases of technical change developed by Balcombe et al (2000) provide a relatively straight-forward means of correcting product and factor shares in the face of biased technical progress. This paper demonstrates the correction of both revenue and cost shares used in the construction of a TFP index for UK agriculture over the period 1953 to 2000 using both revenue and cost function share equations appended with stochastic latent variables to capture the bias effect. Technical progress is shown to be biased between both individual input and output groups. Output and input quantity aggregates are then constructed using both observed and corrected share weights and the resulting TFPs are compared. There does appear to be some significant bias in TFP if the effect of biased technical progress is not taken into account when constructing the weights

ARCOM construction management abstracts : cumulative abstracts and indexes of journals in construction management, 1999 update

The purpose of this document is to provide a single source of reference for every paper published in the journals directly related to research in Construction Management. This volume brings together articles published during 1999. It is indexed by author and keyword and contains the titles, authors, abstracts and keywords of every article from the following journals: • Building Research and Information (BRI) • Construction Management and Economics (CME) • Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management (ECAM) • Journal of Construction Procurement (JCP) • RICS Research Papers (RICS) The index entries give short forms of the bibliographical citations, rather than page numbers, to enable rapid reference to articles. A cumulative volume is available from the editor. Included in this volume is an appendix listing a wide range of journals associated with construction management research, giving details of frequency, editorial addresses and web sites, as well as whether each journal is international and/or refereed.

Evaluation of ozone and water vapor fields from the ECMWF reanalysis ERA-40 during 1991-1999 in comparison with UARS satellite and MOZAIC aircraft observations

[ 1] The European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) 40-year Reanalysis (ERA-40) ozone and water vapor reanalysis fields during the 1990s have been compared with independent satellite data from the Halogen Occultation Experiment (HALOE) and Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) instruments on board the Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite (UARS). In addition, ERA-40 has been compared with aircraft data from the Measurements of Ozone and Water Vapour by Airbus In-Service Aircraft (MOZAIC) program. Overall, in comparison with the values derived from the independent observations, the upper stratosphere in ERA-40 has about 5 - 10% more ozone and 15 - 20% less water vapor. This dry bias in the reanalysis appears to be global and extends into the middle stratosphere down to 40 hPa. Most of the discrepancies and seasonal variations between ERA-40 and the independent observations occur within the upper troposphere over the tropics and the lower stratosphere over the high latitudes. ERA-40 reproduces a weaker Antarctic ozone hole, and of less vertical extent, than the independent observations; values in the ozone maximum in the tropical stratosphere are lower for the reanalysis. ERA-40 mixing ratios of water vapor are considerably larger than those for MOZAIC, typically by 20% in the tropical upper troposphere, and they may exceed 60% in the lower stratosphere over high latitudes. The results imply that the Brewer-Dobson circulation in the ECMWF reanalysis system is too fast, as is also evidenced by deficiencies in the way ERA-40 reproduces the water vapor "tape recorder'' signal in the tropical stratosphere. Finally, the paper examines the biases and their temporal variation during the 1990s in the way ERA-40 compares to the independent observations. We also discuss how the evaluation results depend on the instrument used, as well as on the version of the data.