--- canonical_url: "https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-26/multifactor-productivity-growth-estimation-in-canada-and-the-united-states-do-different-methodologies-matter/" title: "Multifactor Productivity Growth Estimation in Canada and the United States: Do Different Methodologies Matter?" author: name: "CSLS" url: "https://csls.ca/author/cslc/" date_published: "2026-07-13T07:37:50+00:00" date_modified: "2026-07-13T07:37:50+00:00" post_type: "ipm" summary: "" ipm_issue_period: - "Fall 2013" ipm_keyword: - "bottom-up" - "Canada" - "depreciation" - "methodology" - "MFP" - "rate of return" - "Statistics Canada" - "top-down" - "United States" ipm_research_theme: - "Measurement and methodology" ipm_country_focus: - "Canada" - "United States" featured_image: "https://csls.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/IPM_50_banner.webp" status: "publish" --- # Multifactor Productivity Growth Estimation in Canada and the United States: Do Different Methodologies Matter? Canonical URL: https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-26/multifactor-productivity-growth-estimation-in-canada-and-the-united-states-do-different-methodologies-matter/ # Multifactor Productivity Growth Estimation in Canada and the United States: Do Different Methodologies Matter? [Download full PDF article](https://csls.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/IPM-Issue-26-3-Li-Shute-Tang.pdf) Cite this article × Cite this article as: Li, Jiang, Larry Shute, and Jianmin Tang. 2013. “Multifactor Productivity Growth Estimation in Canada and the United States: Do Different Methodologies Matter?” International Productivity Monitor, No. 26 (Fall 2013): 36–62. https://www.csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-26/multifactor-productivity-growth-estimation-in-canada-and-the-united-states-do-different-methodologies-matter/ ## Authors: - Jiang Li University of Victoria - Larry Shute Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada; University of Victoria - Jianmin Tang Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada ## IPM Issue 26 Fall 2013 pp. 36–62 ## Related IPM articles [The Relationship between Efficiencies Defenses for Mergers and TFP Growth Robin Shaban Fall 2025 | IPM Issue 49 | pp. 82–102](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-49/the-relationship-between-efficiencies-defenses-for-mergers-and-tfp-growth/) [Appendix: Variable Definitions and Country/Sector Coverage for Regulatory Reform Analysis Gilbert Cette, Jimmy Lopez, Giuseppe Nicoletti, Océane Vernerey Fall 2025 | IPM Issue 49 | pp. 1–18](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-49/appendix-variable-definitions-and-country-sector-coverage-for-regulatory-reform-analysis/) [The Potential Impact of Pro-competitive Regulatory Reforms on Productivity and Growth in Canada Gilbert Cette, Jimmy Lopez, Giuseppe Nicoletti, Océane Vernerey Fall 2025 | IPM Issue 49 | pp. 3–40](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-49/the-potential-impact-of-pro-competitive-regulatory-reforms-on-productivity-and-growth-in-canada/) [IPM Issue 49 Editors’ Overview Andrew Sharpe, Bart van Ark, Paul Schreyer Fall 2025 | IPM Issue 49 | pp. 1–2](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-49/) [De-industrialization and the Great Productivity Slowdown: What Comes Next? Paul Fisher Spring 2025 | IPM Issue 48 | pp. 115–138](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-48/de-industrialization-and-the-great-productivity-slowdown-what-comes-next/) [ONS Response to ‘Are UK Regional Productivity Disparities Really Narrowing?’ Richard Prothero Spring 2025 | IPM Issue 48 | pp. 85–89](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-48/ons-response-to-are-uk-regional-productivity-disparities-really-narrowing/) [Using Ecosystem Accounting to Integrate the Environment in Measures of Multifactor Productivity Carl Obst Fall 2024 | IPM Issue 47 | pp. 87–108](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-47/using-ecosystem-accounting-to-integrate-the-environment-in-measures-of-multifactor-productivity/) [Eroding Natural Capital: An Alternative Explanation for the Secular Decline in Productivity Growth Christina Caron Fall 2024 | IPM Issue 47 | pp. 109–147](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-47/eroding-natural-capital-an-alternative-explanation-for-the-secular-decline-in-productivity-growth/) [Climate Change and Productivity — An Exploration Dirk Pilat Fall 2024 | IPM Issue 47 | pp. 54–86](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-47/climate-change-and-productivity-an-exploration/) [How Does Industrial Policy Impact Output, Hours and Productivity? The Canadian Experience Tim Sargent Fall 2024 | IPM Issue 47 | pp. 39–53](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-47/how-does-industrial-policy-impact-output-hours-and-productivity-the-canadian-experience/) ## Abstract ## Résumé EN FR Copy link Email LinkedIn National statistics offices in different countries, as well as individual researchers, make a range of different assumptions and use different approaches to estimating multifactor productivity (MFP) growth. As a result, MFP growth estimates can vary for methodological reasons across countries and for a particular country over a given time period. These methodological choices typically reflect a combination of data availability and the objectives of the study. In this article, we use “reasonably” comparable data for output, labour and capital in Canada and the United States to investigate the sensitivity of MFP growth estimates (by industry and for the business sector in the two countries) to three alternative methodological assumptions. We show that MFP growth estimates for both countries and the Canada-U.S. MFP growth gap are fairly robust to the alternative methodologies and assumptions considered. NATIONAL STATISTICS OFFICES IN DIFFERENT Les offices statistiques nationaux dans différents pays, ainsi que les chercheurs individuels, font un éventail d’hypothèses différentes et utilisent des approches différentes pour estimer la croissance de la productivité multifactorielle (PMF). Il en résulte que les estimations de la croissance de la PMF peuvent varier pour des raisons méthodologiques entre les pays et pour un pays particulier sur une période donnée. Dans cet article, nous utilisons des données « raisonnablement » comparables sur la production, la main-d’œuvre et le capital au Canada et aux États-Unis pour examiner la sensibilité des estimations de la croissance de la PMF (par industrie et pour le secteur des entreprises dans les deux pays) à trois hypothèses méthodologiques alternatives. Nous montrons que les estimations de la croissance de la PMF pour les deux pays et l’écart de croissance de la PMF Canada-États-Unis sont assez robustes aux méthodologies alternatives. [Download full PDF](https://csls.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/IPM-Issue-26-3-Li-Shute-Tang.pdf)