> I've seen similar claims that are based on real
> output rather than nominal, which is a dodgy
> proposition, given different national treatment
> of price indexes and changing industry mixes.
The norm, at least for the BEA when looking at the same country with the same indexes, is to use nominal values when measuring shares.
> Here are some WB stats on mfg share of GDP. The
> U.S. has fallen harder, starting from a lower
> level, than the other countries.
>
> 1993 1996 2003 1993-2003 1996-2003
> Germany 23.6 22.2 22.3 -1.3 +0.1
> Japan 23.3 21.0 -2.4
> Sweden 18.8 21.5 19.7 +0.9 -1.8
> United States 18.4 18.2 14.6 -3.8 -3.6
Using the BEA's industry accounts:
http://www.bea.gov/industry/index.htm (click the Interactive Tables for GDP by Industry)
Value Added by Industry as a Percentage of Gross Domestic Product for Manufacturing
1993 : 15.6% 1996 : 15.5% 2003 : 12.4%
The two sets of numbers for US manufacturing move alike, but why are they different? Do the World Bank numbers include something else?
Shane