Treating Intangible Inputs as Investment Goods: The Impact on Canadian GDP

Belhocine, Nazim

doi:10.2139/ssrn.1490660

Cited by 10 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… Innovation. Consistent with other studies, including Belhocine (2009), Corrado et al (2009), andMarrocu et al (2009), the results show that higher innovation activities, as measured by the ratio of intangible assets-to-total assets (IFA_TA), have a positive effect on TFP growth.…”

supporting

confidence: 90%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ireland: Selected Issues

Fund¹

2016

IMF Staff Country Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 90%

“…For this reason, the following analysis will highlight key metrics both in terms of ratio to GDP and GNP. 2007200820092010 Goods and services 4.9 5.4 5.9 5.4 4.9 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.3 -1.6 13.2…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Ireland: Selected Issues

Fund¹

2016

IMF Staff Country Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Table 1 summarizes this information. Belhocine (2008) reproduces Corrado et al (2006) and finds qualitatively similar evidence for Canada, where estimated investment in intangibles has become as large as the investment in physical capital. Fukao et al (2007) and Marrano and Haskel (2006) present similar findings for Japan and the United Kingdom respectively.…”

Section: A the Increased Importance Of Intangible Capitalsupporting

confidence: 60%

Intangible Capital, Relative Asset Shortages and Bubbles

Giglio

Severo

2011

IMF Working Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This Working Paper should not be reported as representing the views of the IMF. The views expressed in this Working Paper are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the IMF or IMF policy. Working Papers describe research in progress by the author(s) and are published to elicit comments and to further debate. We analyze an overlapping generations economy with financial frictions and accumulation of both physical and intangible capital. The key difference between them is that intangible capital cannot be used as collateral for borrowing. As intangibles become more important in production, financial frictions tighten and equilibrium interest rates decline, creating the conditions for the emergence of rational bubbles. We also analyze the question of dynamic efficiency, demonstrating that, in the presence of financial frictions, neither the interest rate test nor the test proposed by Abel et al. (1989) are appropriate. Finally we show that, in general, rational bubbles are not Pareto improving in our framework. JEL

show abstract

“…Since 1995, the rate of labor productivity growth in Europe has been declining throughout almost the whole considered period, with the exception of two short positive time spans coinciding with the upswing of the business cycle at the end of the 1990s and around . Finally, during the Great Recession of 2008-2009, the European Union (EU) saw a decline in labor productivity parallel to the contraction of the economy. Although some EU members are showing good performance in terms of recovery, others are displaying difficulties (Corrado et al 2016a(Corrado et al , 2016b(Corrado et al , 2018.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intangible Assets and Labor Productivity Growth

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examine the contribution to labor productivity growth in the manufacturing sector of investment in different intangible asset categories—computerized information, innovative property, and economic competencies—for a set of 18 European countries between 1995 and 2017, as well as whether this contribution varies between different groups of countries. The motivation is to go a step further and identify which single or combination of intangible assets are relevant. The main findings can be summarized as follows. Firstly, all the three different categories of intangible assets contribute to labor productivity growth. In particular, intangible assets related to economic competences together with innovative property assets have been identified as the main drivers; specifically, advertising and marketing, organizational capital, research and development (R&D) investment, and design. Secondly, splitting the sample of European Union (EU) member states into three groups—northern, central and southern Europe—allows for the identification of a significant differentiated behavior between and within groups, in terms of the effects of investment in intangible assets on labor productivity growth. We conclude that measures promoting investment in intangibles at EU level should be accompanied by specific measures focusing on each country’s needs, for the purpose of promoting labor productivity growth. The obtained evidence suggests that the solution for the innovation deficit of some European economies consist not only of raising R&D expenditure, but also exploiting complementarities between different types of assets.

show abstract

Treating Intangible Inputs as Investment Goods: The Impact on Canadian GDP

Cited by 10 publications

References 9 publications

Ireland: Selected Issues

Ireland: Selected Issues

Intangible Capital, Relative Asset Shortages and Bubbles

Intangible Assets and Labor Productivity Growth

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About