--- canonical_url: "https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-32/pro-productivity-institutions-learning-from-national-experience/" title: "Pro-Productivity Institutions: Learning from National Experience" author: name: "CSLS" url: "https://csls.ca/author/cslc/" date_published: "2026-07-13T07:42:35+00:00" date_modified: "2026-07-13T07:42:35+00:00" post_type: "ipm" summary: "" ipm_issue_period: - "Spring 2017" ipm_keyword: - "advisory council" - "Australia" - "institutional design" - "OECD" - "policy evaluation" - "pro-productivity institutions" - "productivity commission" - "productivity strategy" - "United Kingdom" ipm_research_theme: - "Policy and institutions" ipm_country_focus: - "Australia" - "International" - "OECD" - "United Kingdom" featured_image: "https://csls.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/IPM_50_banner.webp" status: "publish" --- # Pro-Productivity Institutions: Learning from National Experience Canonical URL: https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-32/pro-productivity-institutions-learning-from-national-experience/ # Pro-Productivity Institutions: Learning from National Experience [Download full PDF article](https://csls.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/IPM-Issue-32-11-Dougherty-Renda.pdf) Cite this article × Cite this article as: Dougherty, Sean, and Andrea Renda. 2017. “Pro-Productivity Institutions: Learning from National Experience.” International Productivity Monitor, No. 32 (Spring 2017): 196–217. https://www.csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-32/pro-productivity-institutions-learning-from-national-experience/ ## Authors: - Sean Dougherty OECD; CEPS; Duke University - Andrea Renda OECD; CEPS; Duke University ## IPM Issue 32 Spring 2017 pp. 196–217 ## Related IPM articles [Is the SNA Still Useful? A Review Article on The Measure of Progress: Counting What Really Matters Paul Schreyer Fall 2025 | IPM Issue 49 | pp. 116–124](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-49/is-the-sna-still-useful-a-review-article-on-the-measure-of-progress-counting-what-really-matters/) [Adult Skills and Productivity: New Evidence from PIAAC 2023 Dan Andrews, Balázs Égert, Christine de La Maisonneuve Fall 2025 | IPM Issue 49 | pp. 41–63](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-49/adult-skills-and-productivity-new-evidence-from-piaac-2023/) [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/) [Opportunities and Risks of Artificial Intelligence for Productivity Francesco Filippucci, Peter Gal, Katharina Laengle, Matthias Schief, Filiz Unsal Spring 2025 | IPM Issue 48 | pp. 1–26](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-48/opportunities-and-risks-of-artificial-intelligence-for-productivity/) [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/) [Could Domestic Industrial Policies, Even With Global Fragmentation, Revive Productivity? Catherine Mann Fall 2024 | IPM Issue 47 | pp. 3–19](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-47/could-domestic-industrial-policies-even-with-global-fragmentation-revive-productivity/) [Employment, Output and Productivity Adjustment During the Great Recession: The Role of Managerial Quality Gilbert Cette, Jimmy Lopez, Jacques Mairesse, Giuseppe Nicoletti Spring 2024 | IPM Issue 46 | pp. 101–108](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-46/employment-output-and-productivity-adjustment-during-the-great-recession-the-role-of-managerial-quality/) [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/) [Data Appendix: International Comparison of UK Productivity John Van Reenen, Xuyi Yang Spring 2024 | IPM Issue 46 | pp. 38–82](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-46/data-appendix-international-comparison-of-uk-productivity/) [Measuring Capital and Multifactor Productivity: The Role of Asset Depreciation and Initial Capital Stock Estimates Pierre-Alain Pionnier, Belén Zinni, Kéa Baret Fall 2023 | IPM Issue 45 | pp. 155–199](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-45/measuring-capital-and-multifactor-productivity-the-role-of-asset-depreciation-and-initial-capital-stock-estimates/) ## Abstract ## Résumé EN FR Copy link Email LinkedIn This article analyses and compares ten institutions that have a mandate to promote productivity-enhancing reforms. The selected bodies include government advisory councils, standing inquiry bodies, and ad hoc task forces. We find that well-designed pro-productivity institutions can generally improve the quality of the policy process and political debate, and can make a significant contribution to evidence-based policy-making. Our findings also support the view that concentrating knowledge and research on productivity in one independent, highly skilled and reputed body can help create the momentum and the knowledge that are required to promote long-term productivity growth. Institutions located outside government have more leeway in promoting reforms that challenge vested interests and produce results that go beyond the electoral cycle. Smart government bodies can allow experimental policy-making and a more adaptive, evidence-based policy process. To be successful, pro-productivity institutions require sufficient resources, skills, transparency and procedural accountability to fulfil their tasks; a sufficiently broad mission, oriented towards long-term well-being and with both supply-side and demand-side considerations; policy evaluation functions; and the ability to reach out to the general public in a variety of ways. Over the past two decades, promoting pro- Cet article analyse et compare dix institutions ayant pour mandat de promouvoir des réformes favorisant la productivité. Les organismes sélectionnés comprennent des conseils consultatifs gouvernementaux, des organes d’enquête permanents et des groupes de travail ad hoc. Nous constatons que des institutions bien conçues favorables à la productivité peuvent généralement améliorer la qualité du processus politique et du débat public, et peuvent apporter une contribution significative à l’élaboration de politiques fondées sur des données probantes. La concentration des connaissances et de la recherche dans un organisme indépendant et réputé contribue à créer l’élan nécessaire pour promouvoir la croissance à long terme de la productivité, et les institutions extragouvernementales ont plus de latitude pour promouvoir des réformes qui remettent en cause les intérêts acquis. [Download full PDF](https://csls.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/IPM-Issue-32-11-Dougherty-Renda.pdf)