Documents / FOIA release

USSR: Measures of Economic Growth and Development, 1950-80

Central Intelligence Agency · 1982-12-08 · 399 pages · text from the file's own layer

This Joint Committee Print, dated December 8, 1982, gathers studies that the Central Intelligence Agency's Directorate of Intelligence prepared for the Joint Economic Committee of the US Congress. It gives estimates of Soviet gross national product for 1950 to 1980, with indexes of industrial production, agricultural production and consumption, and explains the methods and data behind them. The foreword says official Soviet statistics inflate growth and that the CIA measures offer a more accurate picture. The document contains no UFO material.

Open the PDF at page 218 Original source ↗

“Gross”60+ pages

  • p. 4 …The volume contains a series of tables estimating the Soviet gross national product and its components…
  • p. 5 …quantified estimates of the value of Soviet gross national product (GNP), its rate of growth, its…
  • p. 6 …The Soviet indices of industrial and agricultural production are based on gross output rather than value…
  • p. 7 …For example, data on the amount of waste included in the gross output data of agricultural…
  • p. 8 …The measure shown represents “net output,” or gross output less products used by agriculture (seed and…
  • p. 9 …compendium on the Soviet eeonomV- “The Real Gross National Product of the U.S.S.R…
  • p. 10 …Contributions of Rush V. Greenslade ________ _________________-________ ____ __ 1x I. Gross National Product of the USSR, 1950—80.-______________________________ 3…
  • p. 12 …Release: 2019/07/19 C05210421 Part I. GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT OF THE USSR, 1950-80 By…
  • p. 14 …Turnover Taxes as a Share of Gross Output in Industry, 1972 6. Subsidies on Agricultural Products…
  • p. 15 …2019/07/19 C05210421 Gross National Product of the Soviet Union in Established Prices, 39 by…
  • p. 16 …of Value Added in Agriculture B-8. Gross Output, Total Material Purchases, and Value Added in…
  • p. 17 …I Soviet Gross National Product in Established Priceskby End Use, I if I970 D-6. I…
  • p. 18 …An International Comparison, 1981 Gross National Product of the USSR: An International Comparison, 1982 Soviet Economic…
  • p. 19 …2019/07/19 C05210421 Gross National Product of the USSR, 1950-80 Introduction This paper presents…
  • p. 20 …Lee, “USSR Gross National Product in Established Prices, 1955-1975,” Jahrbuch der Wirtsc/la/I Osteuropas…
  • p. 27 …GNP for the Soviet Union and of gross domestic product (GDP) for selected OECD countries.” For…
  • p. 34 …Lee, “USSR Gross National Product," p. 413; and Becker, 1969, p. 128. difference between the growth…
  • p. 35 …conducted on a net rather than a gross basis. The enterprise is expected to be managed…
  • p. 41 …the business sector and are included in gross private business investment. The second US account shows…
  • p. 43 …On the other hand, the tax amounts to 30 percent of the gross output of the…
  • p. 44 …Turnover taxes were 30 and 56 percent of the gross outputs of the sugar and other…
  • p. 45 …The capital stock data used in this study are gross of depreciation. Approved for Release: 2019…
  • p. 47 …2019/07/19 C05210421 Table 8 Billion Rubles Gross National Product of the Soviet Union ' in…
  • p. 48 …The row and column sums are determined as each sector’s gross output less, respec- tively…
  • p. 49 …2019/07/19 C05210421 Table 10 Percent 1970 Soviet Gross National Product by End Use W…
  • p. 52 …Therefore, value added is computed as a residual—the difference between gross output and current material…
  • p. 53 …Therefore, if in- dexes of gross output and current inputs are both available, the gross output…
  • p. 56 …Each subbranch index measures the gross output of an I-O sector by summing the physical…
  • p. 57 …The material-input index is less desirable than a double deflation or gross output index, but…
  • p. 58 …2019/07/19 C05210421 Appendix A ' Soviet Gross National Product, 1950-80 This appendix presents the…
  • p. 59 …5 0.5 0.6 0.6 Gross national product 133.6 137.7 145.8…
  • p. 60 …4 ._ §l§5QfI.i2j§§5 1.0 Gross national product 232.3 245.3 254.5…
  • p. 61 …4 1.4 1.4 1.4 Gross national product 383.3 398.2 405.7…
  • p. 62 …0 5.2 3.7 2.7___ Gross national product 5.5 5.9 5.0…
  • p. 63 …8 7.6 5.8 4.0 Gross national product 3.1 5.9 5.2…
  • p. 64 …5.1 4.; 2.9 7.7“ ' Gross national product 5.6 3.8 -1.1…
  • p. 65 …2 3.4 0.8 1 4 Gross national product 3.9 1.9 7.3…
  • p. 66 …9 0.3 2.5 0.3 Gross national product 100.0 100.0 100.0…
  • p. 67 …3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Gross national product 100.0 100.0 100.0…
  • p. 68 …3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Gross national product 100.0 100.0 100.0…
  • p. 69 …3 51.2 55.1 58.3 _ Gross national product 34.9 35.9 38.0…
  • p. 71 …7 134.1 135.2 137.1 Gross national product 100.0 103.9 105.9…
  • p. 72 …27.5 24.. ?6i5j_; Gross national product 133.6 137.7 145.8 153.4 160…
  • p. 73 …1 43.7 45.9 s9.7_‘ Gross national product 232.3 245.3 254.5…
  • p. 75 …4.5 1.1 5.9 -3.1 Gross national product 5.5 5.9 5…
  • p. 76 …0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Gross national product 3.1 5.9 5.2…
  • p. 77 …0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Gross national product 5.6 3.8 -1.1…
  • p. 78 …g 4.3 0.0 0.0 Gross national product 3.9 1.9 7.3…
  • p. 79 …1 28.1 29.1 30.2 Gross national product 741.7 752.2 784.0…
  • p. 80 …9 36.6 31.8 Ww3§’.98W Gross national product 1,083.8 1,124.6…
  • p. 81 …1 46.1 46.9 46.8 Gross national product 1,578.5 1,624.6…
  • p. 82 …3.2 7* 1.4 1.3 Gross national product 3.7 4.0 3.5…
  • p. 83 …1 14.0 13.8 13.5 Gross national product 100.0 100.0 100.0…
  • p. 84 …8 13.4 13.3 7 17717 Gross national product 100.0 100.0 100.0…
  • p. 85 …4 9.6 8.1 6.9 Gross national product 100.0 100.0 100.0…
  • p. 86 …31.7 65.3______s.9 g Gross national product 34.9 35.9 38.0…
  • p. 87 …9 98.2 103.1 89.1 Gross national product 60.6 64.0 66.4…
  • p. 88 …8 110.4 93.7 81.8 Gross national product 100.0 103.9 105.9…
  • p. 89 …Subtracting the deflated material pur- chases from the deflated gross output produces value added in constant…
  • p. 90 …The ratio of material inputs (gross output less NMP) to gross output declined slowly in this…
Approved for Release: 2019/07/19 C05210421
Table 17
Comparison of Growth of Quantity and
Value Series Within Branches of Industry
Average Annual Percent
1951-55 1956-60 1961-65 1966-70 1971-75 1976-79
Wood, pulp, and paper
Quantity series 7.0 5.0 1.8 1.9 1.3 —2.6
Official value series 18.1 17.8 10.4 9.1 8.8 4.3
Chemicals and petrochemicals
Quantity series 1 1.4 10.2 11.8 8.9 8.4 3.3
ifficial value series 20.8 19.4 16.1 9.7 11.7 6.0O
Light industry
Quantity series 9.3 5.9 3.2 4.9 2.3 1.7
Official value series 13.4 7.6 1.2 12.2 3.5 4.5
Consumer durables
-9
Quantity series 17.7 11.5 9.4 7.6 14.8 2.1
Official value series 17.7 9.9 9.7 12.9 10.5 8.4
Producer durables
Quantity series 10.8 12.2 6.8 5.5 5.1 2.2
Official value series 12.9 12.5 10.9 10.0 11.0 8.4
Whatever the reason, a wide disparity in growth rates
clearly exists between the two types of subsamples in
the producer durables index. I-low the underlying
biases might affect the overall machinery index and
the industrial index can only be judged by some fairly
arbitrary sensitivity testing (table 19).
Six different assumptions regarding the bias in the
producer durables sample are tested. In each case, we
assume that the SPIOER growth rates are biased for
specific reasons and reestimate growth taking into
account the assumed adjustments. The cases tested
allow for the downward biases of the quantity series,
the upward biases of the value series, and combina-
tions of both. The alternative assumptions are:
1. Real growth of the value series is the same as that
of the quantity sample.
2. Real growth of the value series is 2 percentage
points higher than that of the quantity series.
3. Real growth of the quantity series is 1 percentage
point higher than the measured rate and equals the
real growth of the value series.
4. Inflation in the value series is 3 percent per year.
5. The downward bias in the quantity series is 1
percentage point per year, and the upward bias in
value series is 3 percentage points per year.
6. The downward bias in the quantity series is 1
percentage point per year, and real growth in the
value series is 2 percentage points per year higher
than the adjusted growth in the quantity series.
The impact of possible biases in the producer durables
sample weakens considerably at higher levels of ag-
gregation. The largest discrepancy between SPIOER
growth and growth of hybrid indexes (1951-79) is 2.2
percentage points for producer durables, 1.2 percent-
age points for machinery, and just 0.3 percentage
point for total industry. Moreover, in this case ma-
chinery growth is unrealistically low compared with
that in other industrial sectors. Assumptions that give
a more realistic machinery growth suggest that the
error introduced into SPIOER indexes by any bias in
the machinery index is no larger than half that in the
worst case.
216
Approved for Release: 2019/07/19 C05210421

Not linked to a story yet.

About this file

FOIA release, from the cia-readingroom collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is under it. 399 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.