--- canonical_url: "https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-45/measuring-productivity-the-response-of-national-statistical-institutes-to-the-oecds-productivity-and-capital-manuals/" title: "Measuring Productivity: The Response of National Statistical Institutes to the OECD’s Productivity and Capital Manuals" author: name: "CSLS" url: "https://csls.ca/author/cslc/" date_published: "2026-07-13T08:15:05+00:00" date_modified: "2026-07-17T09:31:22+00:00" post_type: "ipm" summary: "" ipm_issue_period: - "Fall 2023" ipm_keyword: - "capital manual" - "capital services" - "double deflation" - "KLEMS" - "LSE" - "measurement" - "national statistical institutes" - "NSI" - "OECD productivity manual" - "Oulton" - "Schreyer" ipm_research_theme: - "Measurement and methodology" ipm_country_focus: - "International" - "OECD" featured_image: "https://csls.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/IPM_50_banner.webp" status: "publish" --- # Measuring Productivity: The Response of National Statistical Institutes to the OECD’s Productivity and Capital Manuals Canonical URL: https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-45/measuring-productivity-the-response-of-national-statistical-institutes-to-the-oecds-productivity-and-capital-manuals/ # Measuring Productivity: The Response of National Statistical Institutes to the OECD’s Productivity and Capital Manuals [Download full PDF article](https://csls.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/IPM-Issue-45-8-Oulton.pdf) Cite this article × Cite this article as: Oulton, Nicholas. 2023. “Measuring Productivity: The Response of National Statistical Institutes to the OECD’s Productivity and Capital Manuals.” International Productivity Monitor, No. 45 (Fall 2023): 200–225. https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-45/measuring-productivity-the-response-of-national-statistical-institutes-to-the-oecds-productivity-and-capital-manuals/ ## Author: - Nicholas Oulton London School of Economics; National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) ## IPM Issue 45 Fall 2023 pp. 200–225 ## 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/) [The UK Productivity Slowdown: A Review of Timing, Magnitude, and Drivers Josh Martin Spring 2025 | IPM Issue 48 | pp. 1–34](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-48/the-uk-productivity-slowdown-a-review-of-timing-magnitude-and-drivers/) [IPM Issue 48 Editors’ Overview Andrew Sharpe, Bart van Ark, Paul Schreyer Spring 2025 | IPM Issue 48 | pp. 1–2](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-48/) [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/) [IPM Issue 45 Editors’ Overview Andrew Sharpe, Bart van Ark Fall 2023 | IPM Issue 45 | pp. 1–4](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-45/) [The Link Between the Standard of Living and Labour Productivity in the UK: A Decomposition Nicholas Oulton Spring 2022 | IPM Issue 42 | pp. 187–211](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-42/the-link-between-the-standard-of-living-and-labour-productivity-in-the-uk-a-decomposition/) [Time Use, Productivity, and Household-centric Measurement of Welfare in the Digital Economy Diane Coyle, Leonard Nakamura Spring 2022 | IPM Issue 42 | pp. 165–186](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-42/time-use-productivity-and-household-centric-measurement-of-welfare-in-the-digital-economy/) [Have Productivity and Pay Decoupled in the UK? Andreas Teichgräber, John Van Reenen Fall 2021 | IPM Issue 41 | pp. 31–60](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-41/have-productivity-and-pay-decoupled-in-the-uk/) [Digitalization and the Future of Productivity: Possibilities and Measurement Eric Santor Fall 2020 | IPM Issue 39 | pp. 81–90](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-39/digitalization-and-the-future-of-productivity-possibilities-and-measurement/) [The State of Productivity Research Marshall Reinsdorf Fall 2019 | IPM Issue 37 | pp. 156–161](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-37/the-state-of-productivity-research/) ## Abstract ## Résumé EN FR Copy link Email LinkedIn In 2001, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development issued its Productivity Manual, alongside its Capital Manual (the latter was updated in 2009). These Manuals set out a detailed guide for National Statistical Institutes (NSIs) on how to expand their national accounts to incorporate a production account using the KLEMS methodology. In many cases full acceptance of these proposals might well require changes to national accounts methodology, for instance the adoption of double deflation, and also a considerable statistical effort, such as incorporating data on wages and employment into the national accounts in a consistent way. This article summarizes the response of some leading NSIs to this challenge and assesses how far they have succeeded in meeting it. En 2001, l’OCDE a publié son Manuel de productivité, accompagné de son Manuel du capital (ce dernier mis à jour en 2009). Ces manuels ont établi un guide détaillé pour les instituts statistiques nationaux sur la façon d’étendre leurs comptes nationaux pour intégrer un compte de production selon la méthodologie KLEMS. Dans de nombreux cas, l’acceptation complète de ces propositions pourrait nécessiter des changements à la méthodologie des comptes nationaux, comme l’adoption de la double déflation, ainsi qu’un effort statistique considérable. Cet article résume la réponse de certains grands instituts statistiques nationaux à ce défi et évalue dans quelle mesure ils ont réussi à le relever. [Download full PDF](https://csls.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/IPM-Issue-45-8-Oulton.pdf)