TFP change, output gap and inflation in the Russian Federation (1994–2006)

Michaelides, Panayotis G.; Milios, John

doi:10.1016/j.jeconbus.2008.10.001

Cited by 15 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In line with the most empirical studies, we will employ constant returns to scale, just as in the original Solow model. According to (Michaelides & Millos, 2009), the labour content of the Russian economy has been stable, oscillating around 50%, we thus set both alfa and beta constant at 0.5. For the capital stock, we use the perpetual inventory method (PIM), which suggests that the current capital stock is the sum of the past capital stock adjusted for depreciation and present real fixed investments.…”

Section: Production Functionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimates Of Russia’s Potential Output

Maleček

Janíčko²,

Janíčko

2021

ECO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Taking into consideration the specifics of the Russian economy such as dependency on oil and gas drilling & production, and including the current context of the Western sanctions, COVID-19 pandemic, as well as somewhat idiosyncratic potential output development, the main aim of this paper is to quantify recent output gap for Russia. We use three mainstream methodologies: the Hodrick-Prescott filter as a benchmark, the Kalman filter to follow, and the Cobb-Douglas production function. The sample time span ranges from 1995Q1 until 2020Q3, while all calculations are performed on quarterly frequencies. The analysis suggests that given low fixed investment ratios, limited R&D spending in non-military sectors, and adverse demographic development, under a “no policy change” scenario there might soon be even more downward pressures on the country’s potential output growth, and the economy may continue increasing only at a snail’s pace even after a possible withdrawal of the Western sanctions and the end of the COVID-19 pandemic.

show abstract

Section: Production Functionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimates Of Russia’s Potential Output

Maleček

Janíčko²,

Janíčko

2021

ECO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, Rapacki and Próchniak (2009) and Brock (2010) estimate that the contribution of TFP to GDP growth just exceeded 100 per cent before 2003. Michaelides and Milios (2009) reach even more radical results with average capital growth rate -12.5 per cent and TFP growth rate 15.0 per cent over 1994-2006. See Table 1 for a short review of recent literature.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Values used for α in other studies on Russia include: 0.35 inIMF (2002); 0.39 inMichaelides and Milios (2009); 0.4 inIzyumov and Vahaly (2008) andBrock (2010); and 0.5 inGray et al (2012) andOomes and Dynnikova (2006). In the Penn World Table, Version 8.0, the share is on average 0.41 in1995-2011.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

GDP growth in Russia: different capital stock series and the terms of trade

Kaitila

2016

Post-Communist Economies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are different academic assessments as to what lies behind Russia's GDP growth: total factor productivity or fixed capital investments. Studies that reconstruct capital stocks for Russia using gross fixed capital formation and the perpetual inventory method tend to lean towards the former answer, while capital services datasets that have recently been made available lean towards the latter. We reconstruct a capital stock series for Russia for 1995-2013, and compare the results to two capital services time series using the Solow growth model. We also take into account terms of trade developments that have lent strong support to the economy. Finally, we use these tools to construct four possible scenarios for Russia's economic growth up until 2030. TiivistelmäTaloustieteellisessä kirjallisuudessa on erilaisia arvioita siitä, onko Venäjän bkt:n kasvun taustalla kokonaistuottavuuden vai kiinteiden investointien kehitys. Tutkimukset, joissa rakennetaan pääomakanta käyttämällä kiinteiden bruttoinvestointien aikasarjoja ja PIM-menetelmää, päätyvät edelliseen selitykseen, kun taas viime aikoina valmistuneet pääomakannan palveluvirtatarkastelut päätyvät jälkimmäiseen selitykseen. Tässä tutkimuksessa rakennetaan Venäjälle pääomakantasarja vuosille 1995-2013 ja verrataan tuloksia kahteen palveluvirtatarkasteluun käyttäen Solowin kasvumallia. Otamme myös huomioon vaihtosuhteen, joka on selvästi tukenut talouskehitystä. Lopuksi laadimme näillä työkaluilla Venäjälle neljä mahdollista tulevaisuuden kasvuskenaariota vuoteen 2030 asti. I thank the participants at seminars in ETLA and BOFIT for their helpful comments. Any remaining errors and omissions are of course my own. Funding by The Confederation of Finnish Industry and Employers (TT) Foundation is gratefully acknowledged.

show abstract

“…Aggregate stocks also do not reflect productive efficiency of capital as no account is taken of different asset types. For example, one ruble of buildings is assumed to deliver the same amount of services per year as a ruble of software asset.77(Oomes and Dynnikova 2006) for the period1999-2003,(Michaelides and Milios 2009) for the period 1994-2006;(Kuboniwa 2011) for the period 1995-2010 on imputed quarterly data.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…E.g.,(Dolinskaya 2002; Bessonov 2004; Michaelides and others 2004;Oomes and Dynnikova 2006;Michaelides and Milios 2009) 81(Hall and Basdevant 2002);…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

New Measures of Output, Labour and Capital in Industries of the Russian Economy

Voskoboynikov¹

2012

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Russia is an important part of the world economy both now and in the past. Indeed, one would expect an abundance of studies on Russian economic development. In the past, growth and performance in planned economies vis-à-vis the Western world did attract much attention. These types of studies contributed to two revolutions of development thinking, which are the "big push" approach based on success of Soviet industrialization in 1930-s and the unexpected collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. However, recent performance of the Russian economy is less considered while much could be learned from studying the post-Soviet economic development. The key obstacle to the research in case of Russia is data availability. Detailed industrial data of labour, capital and output from early 1990-s onwards is not available both in the official statistics and in the literature. The present paper addresses this gap, providing detailed description of the newly developed dataset, which covers 34 industries in NACE 1.0 classification in 1995-2009. The paper also reports results of output growth rates decomposition into contributions of labour, capital and productivity (industrial growth accounting). Using more detailed data and better theoretical foundation it shows that the contribution of capital to economic growth in Russia is much more substantial that it has previously been reported in the literature until recently.

show abstract

TFP change, output gap and inflation in the Russian Federation (1994–2006)

Cited by 15 publications

References 36 publications

Estimates Of Russia’s Potential Output

Estimates Of Russia’s Potential Output

GDP growth in Russia: different capital stock series and the terms of trade

New Measures of Output, Labour and Capital in Industries of the Russian Economy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About