1.
Comments on Robert Gordon and Joel Mokyr “The long-term future of productivity? The state of the debate”
Jonathan Haskel
Imperial College Business School, CEPR, IZA
Joint OECD-NBER Conference on Productivity Growth and Innovation in the Long Run, OECD Paris, 25-26 September 2014

2.
Productivity growth: a case study
•http://youtu.be/RRy_73ivcms

3.
Productivity growth
•How to think about productivity growth in this process
–Measurement: four wheels are changed, but have to adjust for quality (here, speed). Lessons for ICT, including C (Corrado, 2011), service sector productivity
–Capital deepening: not just the compressed air spanners, but also ICT
–Labour quality: education of the team
–TFP/knowledge/intangible capital deepening: Teamwork
•How to think about productivity growth in this industry
–Highly capital intensive (tangible and intangible), complementary to ICT via TV rights.
–Car racing tastes crosses cultural boundaries
–Globalisation & cheap communications => scale => increased earnings for scarce factors (drivers, owners of rights) => inequality Haskel, Lawrence, Leamer, Slaughter (2013)
•Productivity in other industries
–Spillovers into health

4.
Headwinds?
•RJG:
•So: three elements to RJG story
–So output per person can be slowed by slowdown in
•productivity (labour quality, capital deepening, technical change)
•Lab force participation (women, part-time work, sickness, discouraged workers)
–and then consumption depends on incomes net of debt repayments, which in turn depends upon
•inequality => might be no income rise for most of population, and a no rise in consumption
•Debt => less scope for consumption
•The three elements
–Productivity
–Labour force participation
–Inequality/debt productivitylabour force participation, working hoursoutput output hours worked personhour workedperson 

5.
Headwinds?
•Can we see some of Bob’s concerns in this 1950s picture? The US economy in 1950
–Inequality/debt
–Labour force participation
•Low unemployment/discouraged worker, female participation
•Income inequality and debt would be less: so consumption would grow
•Young workforce with high participation
–Productivity
•Labour quality to improve: graduation from high school/ college?
•ICT revolution to come

6.
Some remarks
•RJG US slowdown is from 2%pa to 0.5%pa.
–Due to debt/inequality = 0.7%pa
–Due to labour quality & demography= 0.2%pa and 0.3%pa
–Due to technical change (includes post 72 slowdown =0.6%)
•Inequality debt
–Applies to other countries?
–Scope for other countries to catch up to US
•Labour quality slowing
–Long term unemployed/discouraged workers: scope for policy?
–Quality of education/graduation rates
•Scope for policy: Fryer/Angrist/Lavy on incentives?
•Long-term technical progress
–Has the ICT revolution played out?
•schools and higher education?
•Is Moore’s law slowing? Byrne, Oliner, Sichel, 2014
•Gains in ICT as capital deepening/TFP in the discovery process
–Hayekian uncertainty
•Syverson , 2013
–Is the IP system fit for purpose?

7.
Is the price decline of microprocessors slowing?
Source: Byrne, Oliner, Sichel, 2014

8.
General purpose technologies and productivity
Source: Syverson , 2013

9.
Source: WSJ, June 2014, Economists Debate and RJG