Productivity of nations: a stochastic frontier approach to TFP decomposition

This Paper Tackles the Problem of Aggregate Tfp Measurement Using Stochastic Frontier Analysis (Sfa). Data From Penn World Table 6.1 are Used to Estimate a World Production Frontier For a Sample of 75 Countries Over a Long Period (1950-2000) Taking Advantage of the Model Offered By Battese and Coelli (1992). We Also Apply the Decomposition of Tfp Suggested By Bauer (1990) and Kumbhakar (2000) to a Smaller Sample of 36 Countries Over the Period 1970-2000 in Order to Evaluate the Effects of Changes in Efficiency (Technical and Allocative), Scale Effects and Technical Change. This Allows Us to Analyze the Role of Productivity and Its Components in Economic Growth of Developed and Developing Nations in Addition to the Importance of Factor Accumulation. Although not Much Explored in the Study of Economic Growth, Frontier Techniques Seem to Be of Particular Interest For That Purpose Since the Separation of Efficiency Effects and Technical Change Has a Direct Interpretation in Terms of the Catch-Up Debate. The Estimated Technical Efficiency Scores Reveal the Efficiency of Nations in the Production of Non Tradable Goods Since the Gdp Series Used is Ppp-Adjusted. We Also Provide a Second Set of Efficiency Scores Corrected in Order to Reveal Efficiency in the Production of Tradable Goods and Rank Them. When Compared to the Rankings of Productivity Indexes Offered By Non-Frontier Studies of Hall and Jones (1996) and Islam (1995) Our Ranking Shows a Somewhat More Intuitive Order of Countries. Rankings of the Technical Change and Scale Effects Components of Tfp Change are Also Very Intuitive. We Also Show That Productivity is Responsible For Virtually All the Differences of Performance Between Developed and Developing Countries in Terms of Rates of Growth of Income Per Worker. More Important, We Find That Changes in Allocative Efficiency Play a Crucial Role in Explaining Differences in the Productivity of Developed and Developing Nations, Even Larger Than the One Played By the Technology Gap

Trade in intermediate goods and total factor productivity

We develop and calibrate a model where differences in factor endowments lead countries to trade intermediate goods, and gains from trade reflect in total factor productivity. We perform several output and growth decompositions, to assess the impact that barriers to trade, as well as changes in terms of trade, have on measured TFP. We find that for very poor economies gains from trade are large, in some cases representing a doubling of GDP. Also, that an improvement in the terms of trade - by allowing the use of a better mix of intermediate inputs in the production process - translates into productivity growth.

Gains from trade and measured total factor productivity

We develop and calibrate a model where diferences in factor en-dowments lead countries to trade di¤erent goods, so that the existence of international trade changes the sectorial composition of output from one country to another. Gains from trade re ect in total factor productivity. We perform a development decomposition, to assess the impact of trade and barriers to trade on measured TFP. In our sample, the median size of that e¤ect is about 6.5% of output, with a median of 17% and a maximum of 89%. Also, the model predicts that changes in the terms of trade cause a change of productivity, and that efect has an average elasticity of 0.71.

The evolution of international output differences (1960-2000) : from factor to productivity

This article presents a group of exercises of leveI and growth decomposition of output per worker using cross-collntry data from 1960 to :2000. It is shown that at least llntil 197.5 factors of production (capital anel education) ",ere the main source of output dispersion across ecoIlomies and that productivity variance was considerably srnaller than in late years. Qnly after this date the prominence of productivity started to sho\\' up in the data. as the majority of the litcrature has found. The gro\\'th decomposition exercises showecl that t he reversal of relative irnportance of proeluctivity vis-a-\'is factors is explainecl by the very good (bad) performance of procluctivity of fast (slow) growing cconomies. Although growth in the pcriod, on avcragc. is mostly clue to factors accumulation. its variance is explained by productivity.