Starting April 25, the
Bureau of Economic Analysis will release a new way to measure the economy each
quarter. It's called gross output, and it's the first significant macroeconomic
tool to come into regular use since gross domestic product was developed in the
1940s.
Steven Landefeld,
director of the BEA, says this new macroeconomic tool offers a "unique
perspective" and a "powerful new set of tools of analysis."
Gross output is an attempt to measure what the BEA calls the "make"
economy—the total sales from the production of raw materials through
intermediate producers to final wholesale and retail trade. Valued at more than
$30 trillion at the end of 2013, it's almost twice the size of gross domestic
product, and far more volatile.
In many ways, gross
output is a supply-side statistic, a measure of the production side of the
economy. GDP, on the other hand, measures the "use" economy, the
value of all "final" or finished goods and services used by
consumers, business and government. It reached $17 trillion last year.
The measure of the
economy's gross output has been around since the 1930s. It was developed by the
economist Wassily Leontieff, but he focused on individual industries, not the
aggregate data as a measure of total economic activity. Gross output has
largely been ignored by the media and Wall Street because the government issued
the number annually, and it was two or three years out of date. That should change
now that it will be released along with GDP every quarter. Analysts and the
media will be able to compare the two.
Why pay attention to
gross output? For starters, research I published in 1990 shows it does a better
job of measuring total economic activity. GDP is a useful measure of a
country's standard of living and economic growth. But its focus on final output
omits intermediate production and as a result creates much mischief in our
understanding of how the economy works.
In particular, it has led
to the misguided Keynesian notion that consumer and government spending drive
the economy rather than saving, business investment, technology and
entrepreneurship. GDP data at the end of 2013 put consumer spending first in
importance (68% of GDP), followed by government expenditures (18%), and
business investment third (16%). Net exports (-2%) makes up the difference.
Thus journalists and
many economic analysts report that "consumer spending drives the
economy." And they focus on retail spending or consumer confidence as the
critical factors in driving the economy and stock market. There is an
underlying anti-saving mentality in this analysis, as evidenced by statements
frequently made during debates on tax cuts or tax rebates that if consumers
save their tax refund instead of spending it, it will do no good for the
economy. Presidents including George W. Bush
and Barack Obama
have echoed this sentiment when they encouraged consumers to spend rather than
save and invest their tax refunds.
Although consumer
spending accounts for about 70% of GDP, if you use gross output as a broader
measure of total sales or spending, it represents less than 40% of the economy.
The reality is that business outlays—adding capital investment and all business
spending in intermediate stages of the supply chain—are substantially larger
than consumer spending in the economy. They make up more than 50% of economic
activity. The 2012 data are gross output $28,693 billion, and GDP $16,420
billion.The critical importance of business activity is clear when you look at employment statistics and leading economic indicators. Employees in the consumer side of the economy (retail outlets and leisure businesses) account for about 20% of the labor force, and another 15% work for various levels of government. Yet the vast majority of employees, 65%, work in mining, manufacturing and the service industries.
Most of the leading economic indicators published monthly by the Conference Board are linked to the earlier stages of production and business activity. These include manufacturers' new orders, non-defense capital goods, building permits, unemployment claims and the stock market. Retail sales aren't listed among the 10 leading indicators either in the U.S. or other major nations. Even the highly touted "consumer confidence index" published by the Conference Board and highlighted by the media was changed in January 2012 to the "average consumer expectations for business conditions."
Gross output also does a better job of gauging the ups and downs of the business cycle. For example, in 2008-09, nominal GDP declined only 2% while nominal gross output fell sharply by 8%, far more indicative of the depths of the recession. Interestingly, since the 2009 trough, gross output has been rising faster than GDP, suggesting a more robust recovery.
Finally, as a broader measure of economic activity, gross output is more consistent with economic-growth theory. Studies by Robert Solow at MIT and Robert Barro at Harvard have shown that economic growth comes largely from the supply side—increased technology, entrepreneurship, capital formation and productive savings and investment. Higher consumption is the effect, not the cause, of prosperity.
Gross output complements GDP and can easily be incorporated in standard national-income accounting and macroeconomic analysis. As Steve Landefeld, Dale Jorgenson and William Nordhaus conclude in their important work, "A New Architecture for the U.S. National Accounts" (2006), "Gross output is the natural measure of the production sector, while net output [GDP] is appropriate as a measure of welfare. Both are required in a complete system of accounts."
Gross output measures spending in both the "make" economy (intermediate production), and the "use" economy (final output). It is a better, more comprehensive measure of the nation's economic activity than GDP, and a better indication of the economy's growth prospects.
Mr. Skousen is a Presidential Fellow at Chapman University and the author of "The Structure of Production" (New York University Press, 1990, 2007), which introduced the concept of gross output as an essential macroeconomic tool.
Source:http://online.wsj.com/news/article_email/SB10001424052702303532704579483870616640230-lMyQjAxMTA0MDIwMzEyNDMyWj
No comments:
Post a Comment