English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This research note reiterates the productivity theory in the Solow growth accounting framework to explore an institutional interpretation of changes in total factor productivity. In theory, total factor productivity or TFP growth is a costless gain in output, which captures the effect of positive externalities caused by spillovers of technological and organizational changes in a perfect market system. This provides a yardstick to gauge institutional effect on output in an imperfect market system if all inputs are properly measured. Using the Chinese case, I show that an integrated approach  a la  Jorgenson and Griliches (1967. “The Explanation of Productivity Change.”  Review of Economic Studies  34 (3): 249–283) that ensures a consistency between theory, methodology and measurement can facilitate empirical exercises even with data problems, and a so-constructed TFP index for China can satisfactorily reproduce China’s post-reform productivity path with institutional interpretations.

In Quest of Institutional Interpretation of TFP Change—The Case of China