Abstract
The aim of this paper is to explore the contribution to labour productivity growth of investment in different single intangible asset types in manufacturing industry for a set of 9 European member states between 1995 and 2010. The results should help us to identify which single or mix of intangible assets types are the main drivers of labour productivity growth in order to define adequate industrial policy measures to promote a better performance of it. Three findings have emerged: first, the contribution of economic competencies - specifically vocational training and advertising and marketing - is the most important. Secondly, there are heterogeneous effects of investment in intangible assets on labour productivity growth in the different considered EU countries. Splitting the sample of EU member states in two groups permits to identify a significant differentiated behaviour between groups. But the characteristics of the countries inside each group are not homogenous enough to define only common measures. This fact provides the answer to the third research question on the implications in terms of industrial policy. We conclude that measures promoting investment in intangibles at EU level should be accompanied by specific measures focusing each country’s needs for the purpose of promoting labour productivity growth.
Highlights
In terms of investment per hour worked for the sample of countries considered in this study, these figures indicate that computerized information and innovative property represent a major part of investment in intangible assets
When introducing the variables one by one in order to identify those intangible assets that are significant for labor productivity growth, we find out an unexpected result, which is that investment in software has no significant influence
This study has explored the influence of different intangible assets’ investment on labor productivity growth, using international comparable panel data on the manufacturing industry for 18 European Union (EU) member states within a panel analysis between 1995 and 2017
Summary
As Roth (2020) says, analysis in this field has been undertaken focusing on different aspects, such as individual or groups of countries, industry, firms, on complementary investments, among others. Research on this issue undertaken by Corrado et al (2005, 2006, 2009, 2013, 2017a, 2018) marks the beginning of a number of studies measuring intangible investment and showing the relevance of intangible capital for labor productivity growth. Similar studies have been conducted in Canada, (Muntean 2014), Japan (Fukao et al 2009), Australia (Barnes and McClure 2009) and Europe (Corrado et al.2013; Goodridge et al 2013; Roth and Thum 2013; Jona Lasinio et al 2011; Jalava et al.2007)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
