Notes

^1.

Gray (1987), for example, demonstrates that environmental regulations in the U.S. negatively affected productivity growth—though presumably they benefited the environment.

^2.

As a result of a request by the Review Panel's staff, we included culture industries in addition to the main infrastructure network industries in this study.

^3.

Additional studies of the impact of regulation might try to capture whether turning points in productivity growth could be identified with specific regulatory events and whether other factors in the underlying technology also favoured the regulated sector in Canada that might have had a greater stimulating effect on them than on their counterpart U.S. industries. But these issues were beyond the scope of this study.

^4.

The financial intermediation industry in Canada and the United States includes the industry depository credit intermediation and no related activities of the North American Industry Classification System; but the U.S. category includes non-depository credit intermediation as well. This is not deemed to be a problem for the comparisons presented in the paper since non-depository credit intermediation makes up only 10% of credit intermediation in the United States.

^5.

The insurance carriers for the United States include related activities that make up a small portion of the insurance industry.

^6.

The reader should be warned that international comparisons of productivity need to be cognizant of differences in methodologies and sources; see Baldwin et al. 2005.The authors have done their best in this study to use data that are as comparable as possible, but nevertheless there may be some differences that affect the quality of the comparisons reported herein.

^7.

For further explanation of these indicators, please refer to Conway and Nicoletti (2006).

^8.

These industries may also be subject to greater measurement problems when it comes to the price data that are used to generate output growth from revenue data.