Publications
132 results found
Goodridge PR, Chebli O, Haskel J, 2015, Measuring activity in big data: New estimates of big data employment in the UK market sector, Publisher: Imperial College Business School
Haskel J, Goodridge P, Hughes A, et al., 2015, The contribution of public and private R&D to UK productivity growth, Publisher: Imperial College Business School
Haskel J, Goodridge P, Hughes A, et al., 2015, The contribution of public and private R&D to UK productivity growth, Publisher: Imperial College Business School
Haskel J, 2015, Understanding innovation better: an intangible investment approach, ASIA-PACIFIC JOURNAL OF ACCOUNTING & ECONOMICS, Vol: 22, Pages: 13-23, ISSN: 1608-1625
- Author Web Link
- Open Access Link
- Cite
- Citations: 3
Goodridge PR, Haskel J, Wallis G, 2014, The “C” in ICT: communications capital, spillovers and UK growth, Publisher: Imperial College Business School
Goodridge PR, Haskel J, Wallis G, 2014, UK Innovation Index 2014, UK Innovation Index 2014, Publisher: Nesta, 14/07
Haskel J, Corrado C, Jona-Lasinio C, 2014, Knowledge spillovers, ICT and productivity growth, Publisher: Imperial College Business School
Haskel J, Haskel J, Hughes A, et al., 2014, The economic significance of the UK science base: a report for the Campaign for Science and Engineering, Publisher: Imperial College Business School
Haskel J, Goodridge P, Wallis G, 2014, Estimating UK investment in intangible assets and Intellectual Property Rights, Publisher: Imperial College Business School
Haskel J, Goodridge P, Wallis G, 2014, UK investment in intangible assets: Report for NESTA, Publisher: Imperial College Business School
Corrado C, Haskel J, Jona-Lasinio C, et al., 2013, Innovation and intangible investment in Europe, Japan, and the United States, OXFORD REVIEW OF ECONOMIC POLICY, Vol: 29, Pages: 261-286, ISSN: 0266-903X
- Author Web Link
- Open Access Link
- Cite
- Citations: 64
Goodridge P, Haskel J, Wallis G, 2013, A Response to Bill Martin and Robert Rowthorn, National Institute Economic Review, Vol: 226, ISSN: 0027-9501
This note responds to a critique of our recent paper, "Can Intangible Investment Explain the UK Productivity Puzzle?". In that critique Martin and Rowthorn (MR) present a re-working of data on labour composition which they feel refutes an element of our argument. In this response we argue that the data are still in support of our original position. Essentially, the puzzle is that measured labour productivity has been falling, but labour quality is rising, so, at least on this measure, changes in labour quality cannot explain falling productivity. © 2013 National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
Greenhalgh C, Haskel J, Helmers C, 2013, Introduction to the Special Issue on Innovation and Intellectual Property, OXFORD ECONOMIC PAPERS-NEW SERIES, Vol: 65, Pages: 597-602, ISSN: 0030-7653
- Author Web Link
- Cite
- Citations: 1
Haskel J, Goodridge P, Wallis G, 2013, Can intangible investment explain the UK productivity puzzle?, Publisher: Imperial College Business School
Haskel J, Corrado C, Jona-Lasinio C, et al., 2013, Innovation and intangible investment in Europe, Japan and the US, Publisher: Imperial College Business School
Goodridge P, Haskel J, Wallis G, 2013, Can Intangible Investment Explain the UK Productivity Puzzle?, National Institute Economic Review, Vol: 224, Pages: R48-R58, ISSN: 0027-9501
<jats:p>This paper investigates whether intangibles might explain the UK productivity puzzle. We note that since the recession: (a) firms have upskilled faster than before; (b) intangible investment in R&D and software has risen whereas tangible investment has fallen; and (c) intangible and telecoms equipment investment slowed in advance of the recession. We have therefore tested to see if: (a) what looks like labour hoarding is actually firms keeping workers who are employed in creating intangible assets; and (b) the current slowdown in TFP growth is due to the spillover effects of the past slowdown in R&D and telecoms equipment investment. Our main findings are: (a) measured market sector real value added growth since the start of 2008 is understated by 1.6 per cent due to the omission of intangibles; and (b) 0.75 per cent per annum of the TFP growth slowdown can be accounted for by the slowdown in intangible and telecoms investment in the early 2000s. Taken together intangible investment can therefore account for around 5 percentage points of the 16 per cent productivity puzzle.</jats:p>
Haskel J, Valletti T, Iozzi A, 2013, Market structure, countervailing power and price discrimination: The case of airports, Journal of Urban Economics, Vol: 74, Pages: 12-26, ISSN: 1744-6783
Haskel J, Wallis G, 2013, Public support for innovation, intangible investment and productivity growth in the UK market sector, Economics Letters, ISSN: 1744-6783
Borgo MD, Goodridge P, Haskel J, et al., 2012, Productivity and Growth in UK Industries: An Intangible Investment Approach*, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Vol: n/a, ISSN: 0305-9049
Haskel J, Goodridge P, Wallis G, 2012, UK Innovation Index: productivity and growth in UK industries, Publisher: Imperial College Business School
Haskel J, Corrado C, Jona-Lasinio C, et al., 2012, Intangible capital and growth in advanced economies: measurement methods and comparative results, Publisher: Imperial College Business School
Corrado CA, Haskel J, Iommi M, et al., 2012, Intangible Capital and Growth in Advanced Economies: Measurement and Comparative Results
Goodridge P, Haskel J, 2012, Updating the Value of UK Copyright Investment, Intellectual Property Office Research Paper
Haskel J, Lawrence RZ, Leamer EE, et al., 2012, Globalization and US Wages: Modifying Classic Theory to Explain Recent Facts, JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES, Vol: 26, Pages: 119-139, ISSN: 0895-3309
- Author Web Link
- Open Access Link
- Cite
- Citations: 62
Haskel J, Goodridge P, Corrado C, 2011, Constructing a price deflator for R&D: calculating the price of knowledge investments as a residual, Publisher: Imperial College Business School
Haskel J, Goodridge P, Pesole A, et al., 2011, Productivity and growth in UK industries: an intangible investment approach, Publisher: Imperial College Business School
Haskel J, Pesole A, 2011, Design Services, Design Rights and Design Life Lengths in the UK
Haskel J, Sadun R, 2011, Regulation and UK Retailing Productivity: Evidence from Micro Data, Economica, ISSN: 0013-0427
Farooqui S, Goodridge P, Haskel J, 2011, The Role of Intellectual Property Rights in the UK Market Sector, Intellectual Property Office Research Paper
Haskel J, Iozzi A, Valletti T, 2011, Market Structure, Countervailing Power and Price Discrimination: The Case of Airports
We study bargained input prices where up and downstream firms can choose alternative vertical partners. We apply our model to airport landing fees where a number of interesting policy questions have arisen. For example, what is the impact of joint ownership of airports? Does airline countervailing power stop airports raising fees? Should airports be prohibited, as an EU directive intends, from charging differential prices to airlines? Our major findings are: (a) an increase in upstream concentration or in the substitutability between airports always increases the landing fee; (b) the effect of countervailing power, via an increase in downstream concentration, typically lowers landing fees, but depends on the competition regime between airlines and whether airports can price discriminate: airline concentration reduces the landing fee when downstream competition is in quantities, but if downstream competition is in prices landing fees fall only where airports cannot discriminate. Furthermore, only in a specific case (Bertrand competition, uniform landing fees and undifferentiated goods) will lower fees pass through to consumers. (c) With Cournot competition, uniform landing fees are always higher than discriminatory fees, while the reverse is true with Bertrand competition.
This data is extracted from the Web of Science and reproduced under a licence from Thomson Reuters. You may not copy or re-distribute this data in whole or in part without the written consent of the Science business of Thomson Reuters.