--- canonical_url: "https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-9/measuring-the-canada-u-s-productivity-gap-industry-dimensions/" title: "Measuring the Canada-U.S. Productivity Gap: Industry Dimensions" author: name: "CSLS" url: "https://csls.ca/author/cslc/" date_published: "2026-07-13T06:53:20+00:00" date_modified: "2026-07-13T06:53:20+00:00" post_type: "ipm" summary: "" ipm_issue_period: - "Fall 2004" ipm_keyword: - "benchmark" - "Canada" - "capital intensity" - "industry-level" - "labour productivity" - "manufacturing" - "productivity gap" - "services" - "TFP" - "United States" ipm_research_theme: - "Productivity trends and comparisons" ipm_country_focus: - "Canada" - "United States" featured_image: "https://csls.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/IPM_50_banner.webp" status: "publish" --- # Measuring the Canada-U.S. Productivity Gap: Industry Dimensions Canonical URL: https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-9/measuring-the-canada-u-s-productivity-gap-industry-dimensions/ # Measuring the Canada-U.S. Productivity Gap: Industry Dimensions [Download full PDF article](https://csls.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/IPM-Issue-9-1-Rao-Tang-Wang.pdf) Cite this article × Cite this article as: Rao, Someshwar, Jianmin Tang, and Weimin Wang. 2004. “Measuring the Canada-U.S. Productivity Gap: Industry Dimensions.” International Productivity Monitor, No. 9 (Fall 2004): 3–14. https://www.csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-9/measuring-the-canada-u-s-productivity-gap-industry-dimensions/ ## Authors: - Someshwar Rao Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada - Jianmin Tang Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada - Weimin Wang Micro-Economic Policy Analysis Branch, Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada ## IPM Issue 9 Fall 2004 pp. 3–14 ## Related IPM articles [Efficiency Adjustment of Hours Worked: Two Possible Modifications of a Jorgensen Production Model Barbara Fraumeni Fall 2025 | IPM Issue 49 | pp. 103–115](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-49/efficiency-adjustment-of-hours-worked-two-possible-modifications-of-a-jorgensen-production-model/) [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/) [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/) [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/) [Appendix: UK Productivity Growth Rates Across Data Vintages and Studies Josh Martin Spring 2025 | IPM Issue 48 | pp. 65–73](https://csls.ca/ipm-archive/ipm-issue-48/appendix-uk-productivity-growth-rates-across-data-vintages-and-studies/) [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/) ## Abstract ## Résumé EN FR Copy link Email LinkedIn This article presents benchmark estimates of the Canada-U.S. labour productivity and total factor productivity gap for 29 industries for 1999, extended to cover 1997-2001. In 2001, output per hour in the Canadian business sector was 82 per cent of the U.S. level, with TFP at 87 per cent. Lower capital intensity accounted for about 30 per cent of the labour productivity gap. Three of four major sectors had productivity below U.S. levels — manufacturing (80 per cent), services (81 per cent), and primary industries (87 per cent) — while construction exceeded U.S. levels (129 per cent). The largest within-manufacturing gaps were in electronic and electrical products, fabricated metal, and machinery and computers. Cet article présente des estimations de référence de l’écart de productivité du travail et de productivité multifactorielle (PMF) entre le Canada et les États-Unis pour 29 industries en 1999, étendues à la période 1997-2001. En 2001, la production par heure dans le secteur des entreprises canadien représentait 82 % du niveau américain, avec une PMF à 87 %. La plus faible intensité du capital expliquait environ 30 % de l’écart de productivité du travail. Trois des quatre grands secteurs affichaient une productivité inférieure aux niveaux américains — la fabrication (80 %), les services (81 %) et les industries primaires (87 %) — tandis que la construction dépassait les niveaux américains (129 %). Les plus grands écarts au sein du secteur manufacturier se trouvaient dans les produits électroniques et électriques, les produits en métal ouvré, et les machines et ordinateurs. [Download full PDF](https://csls.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/IPM-Issue-9-1-Rao-Tang-Wang.pdf)