From Productivity Analysis in Asia to Creating
Asia KLEMS Database
The 1st World KLEMS Conference
August 19-20, 2010
Tsutomu Miyagawa
(GakushuinUniversity)
Contents
1. An Overview of Productivity Databases in
Asia
2. Japan Industrial Productivity (JIP) Database
and Korea Industrial Productivity (KIP)
Database
3. Productivity Analysis in Japan and Korea
4. Productivity Analysis in Other Asian
Countries
5. Proposals for Creating Asia KLEMS
Database
1. An Overview of Productivity Databases in Asia
• Asia is growth engine of the world economy.
• Productivity data as well as several kinds of
economic indicators should be compiled
accurately and publicly available.
• To achieve the above objectives, we need to
share information on our databases.
Productivity Databases in Asia
JIP Database
sharing information
KIP
Database
providing
data
EUKLEMS
Database
sharing
information
CIP
Database
in progress
APO
Productivity
Databook
measurement in aggregate TFP growth
in Japan, Korea, China, and Taiwan
and labor productivity data
in 20 Asian countries (+China)
2. Japan Industrial Productivity (JIP) Database and Korea
Industrial Productivity (KIP) Database
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Professor Kuroda of Keio University is the pioneer of productivity analysis in
Japan.
Professor Kuroda and other researchers at Keio University compiled a
productivity database (called KEO database) in the 1990s.
Following the KEO database, Professor Fukao and I started the JIP database
project in 1999, because we were interested in the productivity slowdown in
Japan.
Every part (I-O, labor account, capital account) of the JIP database follows a
standard method in the KLEMS project.
At first, the JIP database project was supported by the Economic and Social
Research Institute (ESRI) in the Cabinet Office. The project was then moved
to the Research Institute of Economics, Trade, and Industry (RIETI) in 2004.
The JIP database is revised every year and is published on the RIETI
Website(http://www.rieti.go.jp/en/database/JIP2009/index.html)
Compared to the KEO database, the JIP database has more detailed industry
classifications in the service sector.
2. Japan Industrial Productivity (JIP) Database and Korea
Industrial Productivity (KIP) Database (contd.)
• At the same time, Professor Pyo of Seoul National University started
the KIP database project.
• The KIP database also follows the standard method in the KLEMS
project.
• The KIP database has been published on the Korea Productivity
Center Website (http://www.kpc.or.kr/eng/state/2009_kip.) since 2007.
• The JIP database team and the KIP database team share information
on productivity databases and productivity growth in both countries
every year.
• Both team members have provided their data to EUKLEMS database.
An Overview of JIP Database and KIP Database
JIP Database 2009
Industry
Classification
108 industries (including 52
manufacturing industries)
Estimation period is from 1970 to 2006
Estimation Period (output and intermediate inputs are
estimated from 1973 to 2006)
KIP Database
Following the industry classification in
EUKLEMS Database, it covers 72
industries (including 31manufacturing
industries)
Estimation period is from 1970 to 2007.
Gender :2 classifications
Gender :2 classifications
Age: 11 classifications
Age: 5 classifications
Employment status: 3 classifications
Labor sklii: 3 classifications
Labor Account
Education: 4 classifications
Capital Account
Capital asset is classified into 37 types.
Depreciation rate is the same as that
published by BEA
8 types of capital assets. Depreciation rate
is measured by using National Wealth
Survey.
(Source)
JIP Database: Fukao et,al (2007) and
KIP
http://www.rieti.go.jp/en/database/JIP2009 Database:http://www.kpc.or.kr/eng/state/2
/index.html
009_kip.asp?c_menu=5&s_menu=5_4
3. Productivity Analysis in Japan and Korea
• Growth accounting in Japan and Korea showed the
slowdown in growth in Japanese value added after 1995,
while the Korean economy has maintained 5% growth
rate.
• In Japan, not only the negative growth rate in labor input
that resulted from the low birth rate, but also the
slowdown in capital accumulation and productivity were
the reasons for the low growth rate for 15 years.
• In Korea, a high capital accumulation rate has supported
their high economic growth rate.
Growth accounting including ICT capital service (Market economy)(%)
Value added
Labor
Man-hour
Labor quality
Capital
ICT capital
Non-ICT capital
MFP
1980-1995
Korea
Japan
9.5
3.9
2.2
0.4
1.6
0.1
0.6
0.3
7.1
2.0
0.7
0.5
6.5
1.5
0.2
1.5
1995-2000
Korea
Japan
5.0
1.0
0.2
-0.4
-0.2
-0.9
0.5
0.4
3.9
1.1
0.7
0.5
3.1
0.6
0.8
0.4
Source: JIP Database and KIP Database.
*Growth accounting in Japan was conducted for the period 2000-2006
2000-2007
Korea
Japan*
4.6
1.0
0.8
-0.7
0.1
-1.0
0.7
0.4
2.5
1.1
0.4
0.4
2.2
0.6
1.3
0.6
3. Productivity Analysis in Japan and Korea (contd.)
• When we examine productivity growth by
industry, the manufacturing sector, particularly
ICT industries (electric machinery, post and
communication industries) in Korea marked high
productivity growth.
• In Japan, productivity in the manufacturing
sector (with the exception of ICT industries)
slowed down after 1995.
• Productivity growth in the service sector in both
countries is low.
International Comparison in MFP Growth in the
Manufacturing Sector
Manufacturing, excluding electrical machinery
Electrical machinery, post and communication
14.0
3.0
12.0
2.5
10.0
2.0
8.0
1.5
1980-1995
0.0
-0.5
US
Italy
UK
France
Korea
Japan
Germany
-1.0
US
0.0
Italy
2.0
UK
0.5
Japan
4.0
France
1995-2006
Germany
1995-2006
1980-1995
1.0
Korea
6.0
International Comparison in MFP Growth in the
Service Sector
Distribution services
Personal and social services
2.0
4.0
1.0
3.0
1.0
1980-1995
1995-2006
-3.0
US
Italy
UK
France
Germany
Korea
Japan
-2.0
US
Italy
UK
France
Germany
1980-1995
-2.0
0.0
-1.0
Korea
-1.0
Japan
0.0
2.0
-3.0
-4.0
-5.0
-6.0
1995-2006
3. Productivity Analysis in Japan and Korea (contd.)
• The Korean economy has aggressively
accumulate ICT equipments.
• In contrast to Korea, the ICT
investment/GDP ratio in Japan has been
declining in the 21st century.
• In particular, the contribution of ICT assets
to economic growth is low in the Japanese
service sector.
Contributions of ICT Capital Service Input Growth to Economic Growth (%)
Japan
0.50
1995-2000
Korea
0.73
US
0.57
1.30
0.47
0.82
0.77
0.59
0.45
0.32
0.95
0.24
0.21
0.39
0.31
0.22
0.09
0.64
0.12
0.11
0.32
.Distribution services
0.16
0.69
0.53
0.08
0.23
0.54
.Finance and business services
0.45
1.19
0.75
0.37
0.62
1.04
.Personal and social services
0.12
1.45
0.57
0.08
0.15
0.17
Market economy total
.Electrical machinery, post and
communication
.Manufacturing, excluding
electrical
.Other goods producing
industries
(Source) EUKLEMS Database, November, 2009
*2000-2006
2000-2007
Japan*
Korea
0.37
0.36
US
0.57
4. Productivity Analysis in Other Asian Countries
• Productivity analysis in Asian countries including
Japan and Korea started in the mid 2000s.
• The International Comparison of Productivity
among Asian Countries (ICPA) project compiled
the productivity database in China, Korea, Japan,
and Taiwan.
(http://www.rieti.go.jp/en/database/d03.html)
→Jorgenson, Kuroda, and Motohashi published
Productivity in Asia (Edward Elgar, 2007).
The Structure of ICPO Project
Industry Classification
Estimation Period
Labor Account
Capital Account
33 industries (including 20 manufacturing industries)
1980-2000
Gender: 2 classifications
Age: 3 classifications
Education: 3 classifications
3 types of assets
(Source) http://www.rieti.go.jp/en/database/d03.html
4. Productivity Analysis in Other Asian Countries
(contd.)
• The Asia Productivity Organization (APO) has
published its productivity database since 2007.
(http://www.apo-tokyo.org/index.htm)
• The KEO database team collaborates with the
APO for the compilation of this database.
• This database shows the labor productivity in 20
Asian countries (+China).
4. Productivity Analysis in Other Asian Countries
(contd.)
• Using PPP, the database shows international
productivity levels of the Asian countries.
• Aggregate TFP growth data is also available for
China, Korea, Japan, and Taiwan.
• Labor productivity series in agriculture,
manufacturing, service, and other industries are
compiled in 20 Asian countries (+ China).
Cross-country Comparisons of Labor Productivity
Growth by industry in Asian Countries, 2000-06 (%)
Manufacturing
Mongolia
Kore a
China
Iran
Malays ia
Indone s ia
Pakis tan
Taiwan
Japan
Vie tnam
Banglade s h
Philippine s
Singapore
Thailand
Fiji
Cambodia
Hong Kong
India
Sri Lanka
Ne pal
Se rvice
8.7
7.2
7.1
6.5
5.3
4.4
4.2
4.2
4.1
3.4
3.3
3.0
2.5
2.5
1.6
1.6
0.3
-0.4
-0.6
-4.0
(Source ) APO Productivity Databook 2009
India
China
Indone s ia
Hong Kong
Malays ia
Philippine s
Banglade s h
Sri Lanka
Vie tnam
Singapore
Pakis tan
Iran
Kore a
Taiwan
Thailand
Mongolia
Fiji
Japan
Ne pal
Cambodia
5.9
5.6
4.4
4.0
2.5
2.5
2.4
2.3
2.1
1.9
1.6
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.0
0.8
0.7
-1.3
-3.0
5. Proposals for Creating Asia KLEMS Database
• Three proposals for towards Asia KLEMS
(1) Industry classification: we must start from the low level
of industry classifications due to the lack of available
data in the higher digit level in many Asian countries.
(2) Measuring capital input: we need to measure capital
formation series by asset and by industry.
(3) Collaboration: like Japan and Korea, we need to share
information on data with experts on productivity analysis
in universities or research institutes in Asian countries.