A Response to Bill Martin and Robert Rowthorn
Jonathan Haskel () and
Gavin Wallis ()
National Institute Economic Review, 2013, vol. 226, issue 1, R50-R53
This note responds to a critique of our recent paper, â€œCan Intangible Investment Explain the UK Productivity Puzzle?â€ . In that critique Martin and Rowthorn (MR) present a re-working of data on labour composition which they feel refutes an element of our argument. In this response we argue that the data are still in support of our original position. Essentially, the puzzle is that measured labour productivity has been falling, but labour quality is rising, so, at least on this measure, changes in labour quality cannot explain falling productivity.
Keywords: intangible investment; labour hoarding; productivity (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O47 E22 E24 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:niesru:v:226:y:2013:i:1:p:r50-r53
Access Statistics for this article
More articles in National Institute Economic Review from National Institute of Economic and Social Research Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().