--- canonical_url: "https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-28/measuring-industry-contributions-to-labour-productivity-change-a-new-formula-in-a-chained-fisher-index-framework/" title: "Measuring Industry Contributions to Labour Productivity Change: A New Formula in a Chained Fisher Index Framework" author: name: "CSLS" url: "https://csls.ca/author/cslc/" date_published: "2026-07-13T07:37:58+00:00" date_modified: "2026-07-13T07:37:58+00:00" post_type: "ipm" summary: "" ipm_issue_period: - "Spring 2015" ipm_keyword: - "Canada" - "chained index" - "CSLS" - "decomposition" - "FEAD" - "Fisher index" - "GEAD" - "labour productivity" - "manufacturing" - "mining" - "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" --- # Measuring Industry Contributions to Labour Productivity Change: A New Formula in a Chained Fisher Index Framework Canonical URL: https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-28/measuring-industry-contributions-to-labour-productivity-change-a-new-formula-in-a-chained-fisher-index-framework/ # Measuring Industry Contributions to Labour Productivity Change: A New Formula in a Chained Fisher Index Framework [Download full PDF article](https://csls.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/IPM-Issue-28-1-Reinsdorf.pdf) Cite this article × Cite this article as: Reinsdorf, Marshall. 2015. “Measuring Industry Contributions to Labour Productivity Change: A New Formula in a Chained Fisher Index Framework.” International Productivity Monitor, No. 28 (Spring 2015): 3–26. https://www.csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-28/measuring-industry-contributions-to-labour-productivity-change-a-new-formula-in-a-chained-fisher-index-framework/ ## Author: - Marshall Reinsdorf International Monetary Fund ## IPM Issue 28 Spring 2015 pp. 3–26 ## 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/) [Labour Productivity as a Measure of Technological Change Ulrich Kohli Fall 2025 | IPM Issue 49 | pp. 64–81](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-49/labour-productivity-as-a-measure-of-technological-change/) [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/) [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/) [Accounting for the Decline of Canada’s Real GDP Per Capita since Mid-2022 Philip Smith Spring 2024 | IPM Issue 46 | pp. 83–100](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-46/accounting-for-the-decline-of-canadas-real-gdp-per-capita-since-mid-2022/) [IPM Issue 47 Editors’ Overview Andrew Sharpe, Bart van Ark Fall 2024 | IPM Issue 47 | pp. 1–2](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-47/) [Are Intangibles Running out of Steam? Bart van Ark, Klaas de Vries, Abdul Erumban Spring 2024 | IPM Issue 46 | pp. 38–59](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-46/are-intangibles-running-out-of-steam/) ## Abstract ## Résumé EN FR Copy link Email LinkedIn Canada and the United States use Fisher indexes in their input-output accounts. Existing methods for decomposing aggregate labour productivity growth into industry contributions in a Fisher index framework either leave some productivity growth unaccounted for or are poorly suited for answering relevant questions about the industry sources of productivity growth. This article derives formulas for analyzing industry contributions to productivity change that add up exactly to the aggregate change in productivity and that have useful economic interpretations. These formulas show that the manufacturing sector made a positive contribution to productivity growth in the Canada in 2000-2010 and in the United States in 1998-2012, whereas the widely used GEAD formula implies that manufacturing made a negative contribution. Methods that can be used to decompose chained Laspeyres measures of productivity growth are also developed. These methods would be applicable in countries other than Canada and the United States. ALTHOUGH THE EFFECTS ON wages and living Le Canada et les États-Unis utilisent des indices de Fisher dans leurs comptes des entrées-sorties. Les méthodes existantes pour décomposer la croissance de la productivité du travail globale en contributions sectorielles dans un cadre d’indices de Fisher laissent soit une partie de la croissance de la productivité non comptabilisée, soit ne sont pas bien adaptées pour répondre aux questions pertinentes sur les sources sectorielles de la croissance de la productivité. Cet article dérive des formules pour analyser les contributions sectorielles aux variations de la productivité qui s’additionnent exactement à la variation globale de la productivité et qui ont des interprétations économiques utiles. Ces formules montrent que le secteur manufacturier a apporté une contribution positive à la croissance de la productivité au Canada en 2000-2010 et aux États-Unis en 1998-2012, alors que la formule DGEA largement utilisée implique que le secteur manufacturier a apporté une contribution négative. [Download full PDF](https://csls.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/IPM-Issue-28-1-Reinsdorf.pdf)