About
Articles
Monographs
Working Papers
Reviews
Archive
Contact
 
 

The Productivity Commission Strikes Back

Assistant Productivity Commissioner Dean Parham strikes back at those who claim there have been no gains in productivity associated with microeconomic reform:

The ABS estimates reveal that, during the productivity cycle between 1993-94 and 1998-99, Australia’s annual rate of productivity growth was about half a percentage point above any other rate recorded and was nearly one percentage point above the long-term average. Clearly that was a dramatic rise.

A second issue is whether the higher productivity growth has disappeared. The ABS estimates put the average rate of growth between the productivity peaks in 1998-99 and 2003-04 at just below the average for the past four decades. This indeed indicates that growth is down from the ‘90s highs.

But some further digging into the data provides grounds to believe that the momentum in productivity growth did not disappear entirely. The key point is that there were some once-only factors at work - the Olympics, the GST, concerns about the Y2K bug - that dragged down the average for the cycle. While not a never-to-be-repeated factor, drought also reduced the average.

Australia’s underlying productivity growth in the 2000s has come off the exceptional highs of the ‘90s. However, if the effects of the once-off factors (if not drought) are discounted, average productivity growth during the latest cycle would still have been above the long-term average.

It should also be recalled that the relevant counter-factual in which there were no reforms is not being considered.  Even if Australia’s productivity performance were deemed to be poor, this does not preclude the possibility that this performance could have been even worse had no reform had taken place.

posted on 17 November 2005 by skirchner in Economics

(2) Comments | Permalink | Main

| More

Comments

Productivity growth (including MFP and CD) for period 1984-85 to 1988-89 - the the high tide of micro-economic reform - was a miserable 0.8%, about one third the long run average of 2.4%.

This was caused by a poorly managed deregulation which allowed shonky and reckless lending practices by financial institutions. This led to billions being squandered by “entrepreneurs” and some Australian banks going into temporary de facto receivership in the early nineties, on account of bad debts.

Of course reckless lending on a monumental scale could never happen again.

Posted by Jack Strocchi  on  11/18  at  04:59 PM


broken link to PC. Here fixed.

Posted by Jack Strocchi  on  11/21  at  01:33 PM



Post a Comment

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Follow insteconomics on Twitter