Barot, B (2002) Growth and business cycles for the Swedish economy. Journal of Construction Research, 3(2), pp. 217-253. ISSN 1609-9451
Abstract
This paper consists of two parts. In the first part we carry out a traditional growth accounting exercise for the private business sectors of the Swedish economy. A search for structural breaks during the sample period, using Chow tests with a dynamic specification of Total Factor Productivity (TFP) growth rates, and Granger causality tests are carried out for the nine sectors of the Swedish economy. We combine the growth rates of value added and hours worked and calculate labour productivity for the period 1960-1999. In order to facilitate comparisons we present Swedish and international results. To a large extent we are able to replicate the Swedish results. The slow down in TFP growth rates in the 1970s can be identified with the first and the second oil shocks in 1973 and 1979. The other structural breaks occurred in the early 1990s and could possibly be identified with the tax reform of the century in 1991 and the severest of recessions that took place in the Swedish economy. The Granger causality tests indicate that growth rates in investment Granger causes growth rates in TFP for agriculture and the financial institutions, real estate and other business, while TFP growth rates in mining and quarrying, and manufacturing granger causes growth rates in investment. In the second part of the paper, Hodrick-Prescott filter the data, and calculate cross correlations of detrended outputs, hours, investment leads and TFP at different leads and lags. The results indicate that investment leads TFP for agriculture, hunting, forestry and fishing, electricity gas and water, and for education, health and social work and community social and personal services. Investment lags TFP for the mining and quarrying, manufacturing industry, and for financial institutions and insurance companies, real estate renting and business service companies. Hours worked lead the TFP cycle for mining and quarrying, manufacturing and wholesale/retail trade. The decomposition of TFP into trend and cyclical component dates the business cycle. Standard deviations on the cyclical components of value added , hours worked, TFP, and gross investment reveals that the most volatile variables are gross investment, followed by TFP, GPD and hours worked. The contribution of this part of the paper lies in the disaggregated data set containing annual information for the period 1963-1999, and in the application of several analytical tools to the growth accounting exercise has not been carried out for the private business sectors of the Swedish economy.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | growth accounting; labour productivity; total factor productivity; growth dynamics; Granger causality; recursive Chow tests; crosses correlations; Hodrick-Prescott filtering; leads and lags |
| Index terms: | total factor productivity, quarrying, recession, labour productivity, insurance, accounting, manufacturing industry, Granger causality test, exercise, deviation, specification, dynamics, mining, real estate |
| Subjects: | real estate economics, management, production economics, geotechnical engineering, factor and component analysis, contractual condition, systems engineering, health behaviours and lifestyles, financial and cost management, industry analysis, economic analysis |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Urban Studies, Site Management, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Contract Administration, Business Strategy, Cost Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here