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

Approved for Release: 2019/07/19 C05210421
the share allocated to consumption has decreased by 7
percentage points. The only other country to have a
similar change in output-use patterns is Japan, where
investment has risen from 15 to 33 percent of GDP,
while private consumption has fallen from 63 to 55
percent. Most of the other OECD countries show
either stable patterns of distribution or shifts from
private consumption to other (mostly government)
expenditures.
Growth in Per Capita Consumption. Table 3 com-
pares the average annual growth rates of per capita
consumption for selected OECD countries and the
USSR. There is considerable variance among coun-
tries and time periods. The USSR compares quite
favorably with most OECD countries but lags well
behind Japan and West Germany. Declining Soviet
growth shows up clearly in the Soviet data, with the
growth rate of per capita consumption falling to 1.7
percent per year in 1976-79.
How Reliable Are the Synthetic
Measures of Soviet Growth?
The data used above to describe and interpret Soviet
economic growth since 1950 are based on convention-
al Western national income concepts. While they rely
on published official Soviet data, they reflect numer-
ous judgments about both the meaning of Soviet data
and the best procedures for constructing the Western-
style accounts. The reliability and sensitivity of the
synthetic GNP data can be examined in terms of the:
(1) sensitivity of the growth rate of GNP to the base
year used, (2) patterns in the residual component of
the accounts, (3) comparison with official Soviet NMP
data, and (4) comparison with other Western esti-
mates of Soviet GNP.
Sensitivity to the Base Year Used
When the prices of one year are used to measure
growth over a 30-year span, growth rates in years far
from the base year can be distorted because of
changes in intersectoral price relationships.” As a
check on the severity of this problem, current-price
" Bergson concludes that the long-term decline of the Soviet GNP
growth rate is understated on this account. See Abram Bergson,
“Conclusions,” The USSR in the I 980s, NATO-Directorate of
Economic Affairs, NATO, Brussels, 1978, pp. 231-242.
23
Table 4
Percentage Distribution of 1960 and 1976 Soviet
GNP by Sector of Origin in Current and 1970
Established Prices
§;»=T<§*MTm "rm 7
1976
1970
Prices
1960
Prices _
l 970
Prices
1976
Prices
Industry 47.2 42.1 47.9 48.9
'
Construction 7. 1 7.3 8.0 7.9
Agriculture 17.5 25.1 16.8 16.1 _
Transportation 7 .2 5 .8 7.9 8.4
Communications 0.6 V 0.5 0.8 0.8 WW
Trade 4.6 4.5 5.0 4.9
Services 13.0 12.0 11.5 ll.l
Other 2.8 2.6 1.9 1.9
Sources: The data in 1970 prices are derived by using the indexes in
table A-5 and the established-price weights in table D-7. The
methodology is described in appendix A. See footnote 28 for the data
in 1960 and 1976 prices.
GNP accounts for the USSR were constructed for
1960 and 1976.“ The distribution ofGNP by sector of
origin in 1960 and 1976 in current and 1970 estab-
lished prices is compared in table 4.” In 1960 the
primary difference is that agriculture has a lower
weight in 1960 prices than in 1970 prices, a result
which reflects the fact that price increases for agricul-
tural output between 1960 and 1970 were greater
than those for other sectors.
The rates of growth of GNP obtained by using 1960,
1970, and 1976 as a base year are compared in the
following tabulation:
Average Annual Percent Growth of GNP
Period 1960 Prices 1970 Prices 1976 Prices
1951-60 6.6 6.2 6.1
1961--70 5.5 _ 5.3 _5.2
1971-80 3.4 3.2 3.1
Z8 These accounts are not included in this report, but were
constructed using the same methodology as described in this report
for 1970.
"’ Because of the problems inherent in using Soviet-established
prices for measuring the growth of GNP (discussed in part ll) a
more informative comparison would be in factor-cost prices. At this
time, however, data for 1960 and 1976 in current factor-cost prices
are not available.
Approved for Release: 2019/07/19 C05210421