No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Appendix II: UK Productivity and the Age-Sex Composition of the Labour Force
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 March 2020
Extract
In most papers which set out to analyse movements in US productivity, a good deal of attention is paid to the contribution of changes in the composition of the employed labour force. In this appendix, the effect on productivity in the UK of shifts in the age-sex composition of the labour force over the period 1971-78 is calculated. Further, the prospects for productivity growth in the UK over the next twelve years are analysed with reference to shifts in the age-sex composition of the labour force.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © 1979 National Institute of Economic and Social Research
Footnotes
This appendix considers the extent to which changes in UK past and future trends in productivity are affected by changes in the composition of the labour force. The hypothesis is that certain groups of workers are less productive than others and that shifts in the composition of the labour force in favour of those groups will lower productivity overall. The opposite will be true if the composition of the labour force shifts away from the lower productivity groups.
∗
This appendix was prepared by T. D. Sheriff.
References
Notes
(page 64 note 1) See, inter alia, Mark, J.A., Kutscher, R.E., and Norsworthy, J.R., ‘Productivity outlook to 1985: summary of BLS productivity projections’ in National Center for Productivity and Quality of Working Life, ‘The future of productivity,’ Washington D.C., 1977; Denison, E.F., ‘Some factors influencing productivity growth’ in NCPQWL op. cit., Clarke, P.K., ‘Capital formation and the recent productivity slow down’, Journal of Finance, no. 3, June 1978; Prepared statements by Denison, E.F., Fabricant, S., Mark, J.A., Evans, M.K., and Kendrick, J.W., for the Hearings Before the Joint Economic Committee, Congress of the United States, 95th Congress, Second Session, Washington, 1978.
(page 64 note 2) A narrowing of the earnings differential between males and females during 1971-8 need not imply that the produc tivity ‘gap’ between them has narrowed, for reasons outlined above.
(page 65 note 1) See, for example, British Labour Statistics Yearbook 1976, table 61.
(page 65 note 2) There are two further problems with this adjustment. First, there are some males who work part-time but, because they represent only about 5 per cent of total male employees and because it would be impossible to allocate these to age groups, it was decided to ignore them. Secondly, there is evidence that the incidence of part-time working increases over time and will continue to do so (Department of Employ ment Gazette, June 1979, p. 548). Again no account has been taken of this; any estimate of these movements would only be a rough guess and the size of the change in the incidence of part-time working is not likely to affect our results greatly.
(page 65 note 3) Department of Employment Gazette, April 1978, Table 2, p. 429.
(page 65 note 4) Figures for the Northern Ireland population of working age (Sources: Population projections, Office of Population Censuses and Surveys, p. 2, No. 8 and Monthly Digest of Statistics, CSO) were converted to labour force figures by making assumptions about participation rates (that they are the same as GB) and student numbers.
(page 66 note 1) It is possible to obtain guesstimates of the probability that females will register by whether they are married or not (see The General Household Survey, 1976, HMSO). It is also possible to estimate the probability of whether a female in any particular age group in the labour force is married (Department of Employment Gazette, April 1978, op. cit.). Further, the number of females registered as unemployed by age group is available from the Department of Employment Gazette. With this information and a pro rata adjustment it was possible to make a rough guess at the age distribution of total female unemployment (registered and unregistered).
(page 66 note 2) As an alternative, it was assumed that full employment (i.e. employment as at 1974) was reached in 1983 but the results were little different from those presented in the text.