[ 1 ]
Intangibles: medición y contribución al crecimiento
Experiencia internacional
Matilde Mas
Universidad de Valencia e ...
[ 2 ]
Motivation
Robert Solow (1987) statement about computers can be rephrased as: “While
knowledge economy is all around...
[ 3 ]
Intangibles: Corrado, Hulten & Sichel’s proposal
They cut through the conceptual problem of defining intangible asse...
[ 4 ]
Classification of Intangible assets
Intangible capital asset types
Computerized information
1. Software
2. Databases...
[ 5 ]
The major challenges in capitalizing intangibles
 Intangibles are largely invisible and hard to count:
• Companies ...
[ 6 ]
Consequences
The main consequences of including (some) intangibles as
investment, instead of following the NA practi...
[ 7 ]
MARKET SECTOR INTANGIBLES DATABASE. THE
INTAN-Invest INITIATIVE
INTAN-Invest (Cross country intangible investment da...
[ 8 ]
Investment in Intangibles: Market Economy
(Intan-Invest and Telefónica Foundation)
Composition of the investment in ...
[ 9 ]
9
• The SPINTAN Project is funded by the 7º Framework Program of
the EU.
• It started November 2013 and it has just ...
[ 10 ]
10
At the most practical level, its goal is to complete the
coverage of the sources of growth information already e...
[ 11 ]
11
EU KLEMS (2003-2008 project funded by 6th-7th Framework Programme of the EC)
EU KLEMS, INTAN-Invest, SPINTAN. A ...
[ 12 ]
12
EU KLEMS + INTAN-Invest
INTAN-Invest
(2011-2014)
Capital
ICT assets
Non-ICT
assets
Hours
worked
Labour
compositi...
[ 13 ]
13
EU KLEMS + INTAN-Invest + SPINTAN
INTAN-Invest
(2011-2014)
SPINTAN (2013-
2016, 7th FP)
Capital Capital
ICT
asse...
[ 16 ]
US outperforms the EU in market and non- market intangible
investment . Heterogeneity within EU-15. Sweden and UK i...
[ 17 ]
In R&D the gap with US is larger in the non-market sector
Figure 5: Share of GFCF on R&D over total GDP. EU15 and U...
[ 18 ]
UK leads the ranking in organizational capital investment over GDP in
the market sector, while US tops the non-mark...
[ 19 ]
Denmark (followed by US) is the leader in investment in training in the
market sector and UK in the non-market sect...
[ 20 ]
20
A primary characteristic of intangible capital is to be growth promoting
Corrado, C., Haskel, J. and C. Jona-Las...
[ 21 ]
Conclusions
 Intangibles are able to explain better and better the differences in living
standards among the count...
[ 22 ]
Intangibles: medición y contribución al crecimiento
Experiencia internacional
Matilde Mas
Universidad de Valencia e...
Prochain SlideShare
Chargement dans…5
×

Intangibles: medición y contribución al crecimiento. Seminario de inauguración LA-KLEMS

53 vues

Publié le

Intangibles: medición y contribución al crecimiento. Seminario de inauguración LA-KLEMS. Matilde Mas. 12 y 13 de diciembre de 2016. Washington

Publié dans : Économie & finance
0 commentaire
0 j’aime
Statistiques
Remarques
  • Soyez le premier à commenter

  • Soyez le premier à aimer ceci

Aucun téléchargement
Vues
Nombre de vues
53
Sur SlideShare
0
Issues des intégrations
0
Intégrations
9
Actions
Partages
0
Téléchargements
3
Commentaires
0
J’aime
0
Intégrations 0
Aucune incorporation

Aucune remarque pour cette diapositive

Intangibles: medición y contribución al crecimiento. Seminario de inauguración LA-KLEMS

  1. 1. [ 1 ] Intangibles: medición y contribución al crecimiento Experiencia internacional Matilde Mas Universidad de Valencia e Ivie Seminario de Inauguración LA-KLEMS Crecimiento, empleo, capital y la heterogeneidad sectorial en América Latina Washington DC, Diciembre 12-13, 2016
  2. 2. [ 2 ] Motivation Robert Solow (1987) statement about computers can be rephrased as: “While knowledge economy is all around us, it is still hard to see it in the official statistics”. Since Solow’s remark, important efforts have been made to capture the knowledge economy in the (official) statistics. Milestones:  The new way of Measuring Capital, and thus Productivity, taking into account the distinction among types of assets (OECD Manuals 2001a, 2001b, 2009)  Relevant projects: EU/LA/WORLD KLEMS; Productivity Database (OECD)  The distinction between ICT and non-ICT assets and of ICT producing sectors  The recognition by SNA 1995 of Software, Databases and a few more intangibles assets in National Accounts, and of SNA 2010 including R&D.  Corrado, Hulten & Sichel’s (2005, 2009) proposal to expand NA boundaries to include a selected group of intangible assets  Relevant projects: COINVEST (7th FP), INNODRIVE (7th FP), INTAN-Invest, SPINTAN (7th FP) and KBC (OECD)
  3. 3. [ 3 ] Intangibles: Corrado, Hulten & Sichel’s proposal They cut through the conceptual problem of defining intangible assets by referring to a standard inter-temporal framework that leads to the conclusion that “any use of resources that reduces current consumption in order to increase it in the future […] qualifies as investment”. Then, all types of capital should be treated symmetrically, for example, “investment in knowledge capital should be placed on the same footing as that of investment in plants and equipment”. A convenient consequence of the CHS approach and their emphasis on the symmetric treatment of all assets is that one does not have to worry too much about defining “intangibles” by way of specific characteristics. It is more important to reason in terms of capital goods and to check whether spending activity meets the test of being an outlay now to enhance future consumption.
  4. 4. [ 4 ] Classification of Intangible assets Intangible capital asset types Computerized information 1. Software 2. Databases Innovative property 3. Mineral exploration 4. R&D (scientific) 5. Entertainment and artistic originals 6. New products/systems in financial services 7. Design and other new products/systems Economic competencies 8. Brand equity a. Advertising b. Market research 9. Firm-specific resources a. Employer-provided training b. Organizational structure
  5. 5. [ 5 ] The major challenges in capitalizing intangibles  Intangibles are largely invisible and hard to count: • Companies often do not have exact metrics to separate expenditure on intangibles assets from other expenses.  Intangible investments are often produced within the company and therefore do not represent a market transaction: • However, an increasingly large share of intangibles are traded through markets which allow to impute prices for within-company production and transactions.  Intangibles are often not a direct or continuous input to current production: • Greater emphasis on product innovations represents shift away from Solow to Schumpeterian approach to growth.  Intangibles are largely non-rival and their benefits often not appropiable: • While violating marginalist principles at micro-level, the principles are close enough to the reality of market economy.
  6. 6. [ 6 ] Consequences The main consequences of including (some) intangibles as investment, instead of following the NA practice of treating them as intermediate consumption goods, are: 1. Gross Value Added (GVA) will increase by the same amount that the (new) intangible investment. 2. Thus, the level of labour productivity will also increase. 3. The real rate of growth of GVA when intangibles are included can either increase, decrease, or keep (more or less) constant with respect to the GVA conventionally measured. 4. Growth accounting results are modified. The inclusion of intangibles assets in investment reduces the contribution of TFP growth.
  7. 7. [ 7 ] MARKET SECTOR INTANGIBLES DATABASE. THE INTAN-Invest INITIATIVE INTAN-Invest (Cross country intangible investment data www.intan-invest.net) • Unfunded project • Project coordinators: Carol Corrado (TCB, US); Jonathan Haskel (IC, UK); Cecilia Jona-Lasinio (LUISS, Italy); Maximiliano Iommi (ISTAT, Italy) • Countries: EU-27 + Norway + USA • Period: 1995-2010 (so far) • Private sector of the economy. 9 industry disaggregation • Objective: Getting an harmonized intangibles database for EU- 27 plus Norway & US • Making use of the information gathered by INNODRIVE & COINVEST
  8. 8. [ 8 ] Investment in Intangibles: Market Economy (Intan-Invest and Telefónica Foundation) Composition of the investment in intangible assets, 2010 Percentage of extended private GVA * Sweden, Finland and Denmark. Source: EU KLEMS, INE, INTAN-Invest and author’s own calculations. 1,503 1,789 3,112 2,291 2,614 1,150 ,990 2,557 2,250 3,555 5,202 5,717 4,562 4,293 2,391 3,350 3,452 5,124 4,887 7,272 6,294 4,484 3,524 6,873 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Spain EU-15 Nordic countries* US France Germany Italy UK Computerized information Innovative property Economic competencies
  9. 9. [ 9 ] 9 • The SPINTAN Project is funded by the 7º Framework Program of the EU. • It started November 2013 and it has just finished (November 2016) • It has counted with the participation of 12 institutions from Spain (Ivie, Project coordinator), Italy (LUISS and ISTAT), UK (NIESR and Imperial College), Germany (ZEW and DIW), Austria (wiiw), Hungary (Kopint-Tarki), Sweden (FORES), TCBE (Brussels) and the OECD. • The overall research purpose of the project has been • to identify and measure public sector intangible capital, • to evaluate its role as a driver of firm-industry-country economic growth and • to provide new insights to the innovation policy agenda about the key role of public sector knowledge creation. Smart public intangibles. SPINTAN project
  10. 10. [ 10 ] 10 At the most practical level, its goal is to complete the coverage of the sources of growth information already existing for the market economy [EU KLEMS (FP 6th), COINVEST (FP 7th), INDICSER (FP 7th), INNODRIVE (FP 7th) and INTAN- Invest] including the Non-Market Sector, making possible the generation of total economy growth accounts with intangibles as productive assets. (www.spintan.net) Smart public intangibles. SPINTAN project
  11. 11. [ 11 ] 11 EU KLEMS (2003-2008 project funded by 6th-7th Framework Programme of the EC) EU KLEMS, INTAN-Invest, SPINTAN. A common framework 12 sub-industries 3 sub-industries 3 sub-industries 3 sub-industries ICT assets Non-ICT assets Hours worked Labour compositio n MARKET ECONOMY AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND FISHING A      MINING AND QUARRYING B      TOTAL MANUFACTURING C     . . . . . . ELECTRICITY, GAS AND WATER SUPPLY D-E      CONSTRUCTION F      WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE; REPAIR OF MOTOR VEHICLES AND MOTORCYCLES G      . . . . . . TRANSPORTATION, STORAGE and ACCOMMODATION AND FOOD SERVICE ACTIVITIES H-I      . . . . . . INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION J     . . . . . . FINANCIAL AND INSURANCE ACTIVITIES K      PROFESSIONAL, SCIENTIFIC, TECHNICAL, ADMINISTRATIVE AND SUPPORT SERVICE ACTIVITIES M-N      ARTS, ENTERTAINMENT, RECREATION AND OTHER SERVICE ACTIVITIES R-S      NON-MARKET SERVICES PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND DEFENCE; COMPULSORY SOCIAL SECURITY O      EDUCATION P      HEALTH AND SOCIAL WORK Q      REAL ESTATE ACTIVITIES L      Industry description NACE Rev 2 Factors of production Capital Labour TFP
  12. 12. [ 12 ] 12 EU KLEMS + INTAN-Invest INTAN-Invest (2011-2014) Capital ICT assets Non-ICT assets Hours worked Labour composition Intangible assets, market sector MARKET ECONOMY (industry approach) AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND FISHING A       MINING AND QUARRYING B       TOTAL MANUFACTURING C       ELECTRICITY, GAS AND WATER SUPPLY D-E       CONSTRUCTION F       WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE; REPAIR OF MOTOR VEHICLES AND MOTORCYCLES G       FINANCIAL AND INSURANCE ACTIVITIES K       OTHER SERVICES H-J, M-N, R-S       NON-MARKET SERVICES (industry approach) PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND DEFENCE; COMPULSORY SOCIAL SECURITY O       EDUCATION P       HEALTH AND SOCIAL WORK Q       REAL ESTATE ACTIVITIES L       TFP Factors of production Industry description NACE Rev 2 EU KLEMS (2003-2008, 6th-7th Framework Programme) Capital Labour EU KLEMS, INTAN-Invest, SPINTAN. A common framework
  13. 13. [ 13 ] 13 EU KLEMS + INTAN-Invest + SPINTAN INTAN-Invest (2011-2014) SPINTAN (2013- 2016, 7th FP) Capital Capital ICT assets Non-ICT assets Hours worked Labour compositi on Intangible assets, market sector (industry approach) Intangible assets, non- market sector (institutional approach) MARKET ECONOMY (industry approach) AGRICULTURE, FORESTRY AND FISHING A        MINING AND QUARRYING B        TOTAL MANUFACTURING C        ELECTRICITY, GAS AND WATER SUPPLY D-E        CONSTRUCTION F        WHOLESALE AND RETAIL TRADE; REPAIR OF MOTOR VEHICLES AND MOTORCYCLES G        FINANCIAL AND INSURANCE ACTIVITIES K        OTHER SERVICES H-J, M-N, R-S       (only M72 and R92-92 non-market institutional sector)  NON-MARKET SERVICES (industry approach) PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND DEFENCE; COMPULSORY SOCIAL SECURITY O        EDUCATION P       (only P non- market institutional sector)  HEALTH AND SOCIAL WORK Q       (only Q non- market institutional sector)  REAL ESTATE ACTIVITIES L        Industry description NACE Rev 2 Factors of production EU KLEMS (2003-2008, 6th-7th Framework Programme) TFP Capital Labour EU KLEMS, INTAN-Invest, SPINTAN. A common framework
  14. 14. [ 16 ] US outperforms the EU in market and non- market intangible investment . Heterogeneity within EU-15. Sweden and UK in top positions. The four peripheral countries at the tail end. Figure 3: Share of GFCF on intangible assets over total GDP. EU15 and US. Average 2006-2010 (percentages) Source: Eurostat, INTAN-Invest, SPINTAN and own elaboration. a) Market sector b) Non-market sector 10,8 8,48,3 7,57,47,37,16,96,8 6,36,36,26,16,0 5,2 4,54,54,3 2,1 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 UnitedStates Sweden UnitedKingdom Belgium Denmark France Finland Slovenia Netherlands EU15 CzechRepublic Germany Austria Luxembourg Ireland Spain Portugal Italy Greece EU15 average = 6.3% 2,5 1,6 1,3 1,11,1 0,90,90,90,90,90,80,80,70,70,7 0,6 0,4 0,20,2 0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 UnitedStates Sweden UnitedKingdom Italy Netherlands Austria Portugal Finland EU15 Belgium CzechRepublic Germany Ireland France Denmark Slovenia Spain Greece Luxembourg EU15 average = 0.9%
  15. 15. [ 17 ] In R&D the gap with US is larger in the non-market sector Figure 5: Share of GFCF on R&D over total GDP. EU15 and US. Average 2006-2010 (percentages) Source: Eurostat, INTAN-Invest, SPINTAN and own elaboration. a) Market sector b) Non-market sector 2,2 2,1 2,0 1,6 1,6 1,4 1,1 1,1 1,1 1,1 1,0 0,8 0,8 0,7 0,6 0,6 0,5 0,5 0,1 0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 Sweden Finland UnitedStates Germany Austria Denmark France Luxembourg Belgium EU15 Slovenia UnitedKingdom CzechRepublic Netherlands Ireland Spain Italy Portugal Greece EU15 average = 1.06% 0,9 0,8 0,6 0,5 0,5 0,4 0,4 0,4 0,3 0,3 0,3 0,2 0,2 0,2 0,2 0,1 0,0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0 UnitedStates Sweden Austria Portugal Italy CzechRepublic Denmark Finland Germany EU15 Belgium Netherlands UnitedKingdom France Spain Slovenia EU15 average = 0.29%
  16. 16. [ 18 ] UK leads the ranking in organizational capital investment over GDP in the market sector, while US tops the non-market sector. Figure 6: Share of GFCF on organisational capital over total GDP. EU-15 and US. Average 2006-2010 (percentages) Source: Eurostat, Intan-INVEST, SPINTAN and own elaboration. a) Market sector b) Non-market sector 2,9 2,42,3 2,1 1,9 1,8 1,61,6 1,51,51,41,41,31,3 1,01,00,9 0,7 0,0 0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 3,0 3,5 UnitedKingdom UnitedStates Belgium Netherlands France Sweden Slovenia EU15 Austria Portugal Finland Ireland CzechRepublic Germany Luxembourg Italy Denmark Spain Greece EU15 average = 1.6% 0,4 0,3 0,2 0,2 0,10,1 0,10,10,10,10,10,10,10,10,10,1 0,0 0,00,0 0,0 0,1 0,1 0,2 0,2 0,3 0,3 0,4 0,4 0,5 UnitedStates Belgium Italy Netherlands France Sweden Greece EU15 Ireland Finland Austria UnitedKingdom Denmark Portugal Slovenia CzechRepublic Germany Spain Luxembourg EU15 average = 0.1%
  17. 17. [ 19 ] Denmark (followed by US) is the leader in investment in training in the market sector and UK in the non-market sector. US is above the EU-15 average. Figure 7: Share of GFCF on training over total GDP. EU-15 and US. Average 2006- 2010 (percentages) Source: Eurostat, INTAN-Invest, SPINTAN and own elaboration. 0,8 0,5 0,4 0,3 0,3 0,20,20,2 0,10,10,10,10,10,10,10,10,00,00,0 0,0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 UnitedKingdom Ireland UnitedStates Germany EU15 CzechRepublic Belgium Finland Sweden Netherlands Slovenia Italy France Portugal Greece Luxembourg Austria Denmark Spain EU15 average = 0.3% a) Market sector b) Non-market sector 1,3 1,1 1,0 0,90,9 0,80,8 0,80,80,7 0,7 0,60,50,50,50,5 0,40,4 0,0 0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,0 1,2 1,4 Denmark UnitedStates UnitedKingdom France Germany Netherlands Luxembourg EU15 Austria Ireland Sweden Slovenia CzechRepublic Italy Belgium Finland Portugal Spain Greece EU15 average = 0.8%
  18. 18. [ 20 ] 20 A primary characteristic of intangible capital is to be growth promoting Corrado, C., Haskel, J. and C. Jona-Lasinio: “Spillovers from public intangibles” (Mimeo, Spintan) o Evidence of spillovers from public sector R&D to productivity in the market sector. o Their findings suggest a rate of return of around 50% to public sector R&D spending. o They also find that market sector investments in non-R&D intangible capital generate spillovers to productivity. o They do not find evidence that non-market non-R&D intangible investment has spillover benefits to the market sector. Schiersch, A. and M. Gornig Intangible Capital: “Complement or Substitute in the Creation of Public Goods?” (Mimeo, Spintan) o First analysis of the elasticity of substitution between intangible capital and other inputs for public sector in Europe o Intangible capital is only weakly substitutable with other inputs; but also not fully complementary MORE RESEARCH IS NEEDED, together with expanding and updating already existing databases (EUKLEMS, INTAN_Invest) complementary to SPINTAN. Implications for economic growth econometric results
  19. 19. [ 21 ] Conclusions  Intangibles are able to explain better and better the differences in living standards among the countries.  In order to grow and generate employment, it is not enough to invest in tangible investment (factories, machinery and equipment…). It is becoming more important to invest in intangibles assets. It is precisely in these assets where the differences among countries are larger.  Low investment in intangibles can explain the sudden stop in the process of economic convergence of the UE with respect the US.  All firms should invest more on intangibles regardless of the economic sector to which they pertain since empirical evidence warns us that tangible and intangible capital are complementary. Furthermore, they generate spillovers to other firms and sectors of the economy.  The availability of this information will allow designing public and private policies addressed to improve economic performance.
  20. 20. [ 22 ] Intangibles: medición y contribución al crecimiento Experiencia internacional Matilde Mas Universidad de Valencia e Ivie Seminario de Inauguración LA-KLEMS Crecimiento, empleo, capital y la heterogeneidad sectorial en América Latina Washington DC, Diciembre 12-13, 2016

×