Results of the Global Consultation on Government and Other Non-Market

Results of the Global Consultation on
Government and Other Non-Market
Producers’ Owned Assets – Cost of
Using Capital
Govt. and other NMP owned assets- capital services
In the AEG meeting in Dec 2004, there was strong support in
principle for including a return to capital, viewed as an
opportunity cost, in the measurement of non-market
output. However, concerns were expressed about the
rate of return to be chosen and availability of data for
capital stock.
The ISWGNA has conducted a global electronic consultation:
what should be used to reflect the cost of using non-financial
Consumption of fixed capital only, which is the current
recommendation, or the full cost of capital services
(approximately consumption of fixed capital plus a return
to capital)?
If the full cost of capital is chosen, should it apply to all
non-financial assets owned by the non-market producer
or just some of them?
Govt. and other NMP owned assets- capital services
Do you agree in principle with the proposal to replace
consumption of fixed capital with capital services when
summing costs to derive estimates of output of
government and other non-market producers?
If you agree with the principle but still do not agree
with the proposal, what are the reasons?
(a) Time series data available too short and therefore
stock data for non-market producers not yet
(b) Concerns about having to make assumptions about
rates of return
(c) Concerns about comparability among countries of
such estimates
(d) Other reason
Govt. and other NMP owned assets- capital services
Only 22 countries responded, not enough for any kind of
definitive conclusions;
all respondents (except one) are orgn. responsible for deriving
estimates of output of Government;
Out of 22 countries, 12 agree in principle and 9 disagree;
Of the 12 countries that agree in principle, 8 express
reservation/difficulty in implementation of the proposal;
Only 4 countries agree to the proposal in principle as well as on
practical considerations;
Country consultations on Dec 2004 AEG decisions show that
number of countries that expressed agreement, reservation in
implementation and disagreement of the AEG decision on the
issue are 20, 12 and 14 respectively;
6 additional countries responded to Global Consultation that did
not respond to the country consultation – 3 agree in principle
but not on practical considerations and 3 disagree;
If one combines responses to the two consultations– countries
in agreement : 32; countries expressing reservation/difficulty in
implementation: 20; and countries in disagreement with the
proposal: 23; and
Response too small for analysis of other issues
Thank You