|Page tools: Print Page Print All|
All values, unless otherwise indicated, are shown in Australian dollars rounded to the nearest million.
Where figures have been rounded, discrepancies may occur between the sums of the component items and totals.
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
Growth in experimental GSP chain volume measures
The chain volume estimates of gross state product (GSP) included in this publication are derived indirectly. The method essentially involves deriving the best possible current price and chain volume estimates of expenditure that encompass as much as possible of GSP. The estimates are labelled as 'experimental' for reasons set out in the Explanatory Notes (paragraphs 30 to 34). Users should therefore exercise caution when using these estimates for economic analysis.
The table below compares annual rates of growth in the experimental estimates of GSP chain volume measures and GSP chain volume measures per capita over the ten years 1992-93 to 2002-03. Over this period, growth in GSP chain volume measures varied considerably between the states, with growth being strongest in Queensland and Victoria and weakest in Tasmania. The dispersion of growth rates was less, but still significant, in terms of GSP chain volume measures per capita.
GSP per capita
The graphs below show an index of GSP, in current prices, per capita for each state and territory divided by the Australian estimate for total gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, for the period 1990-91 to 2002-03. It should be noted that GSP per capita cannot be equated with the income of households in a particular state - see comments on gross household disposable income below.
GSP per capita in 2002-03 was above the national average in the Australian Capital Territory, the Northern Territory, Western Australia, New South Wales and Victoria. The Australian Capital Territory had the highest level in all years since 1991-92 except in 2000-01 where the Northern Territory had the highest level. GSP per capita in Queensland, South Australia and Tasmania has not exceeded the national average since 1989-90. Only New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory showed an increase in this ratio in 2002-03.
Real Gross State domestic income
The chain volume estimates of GSP measure the volume of goods and services produced in each state. If the terms of trade for a state change significantly (i.e. the prices for a state's exports and imports change at different rates) then chain volume GSP will not accurately reflect the change in real purchasing power of the income generated within a state. For this reason, real gross state domestic income (RGSDI) is calculated which measures chain volume GSP adjusted for changes in terms of trade. (For details on the calculation method see the Explanatory Notes, paragraphs 35 to 37).
The following graphs show percentage changes in RGSDI per capita over the period 1992-93 to 2002-03. Generally the pattern of growth for each state and territory in RGSDI per capita has been greater than that of GSP per capita over the past ten years reflecting favourable movements in the terms of trade. In 2002-03 there is an exception with Queensland experiencing weaker growth in its RGSDI compared with GSP, reflecting a downward movement in its terms of trade.
Industry Composition of Total Factor Income
Individual industry contributions to total factor income for 2002-03 are shown below. In line with long term trends, there has been a shift from goods producing industries to service providing industries over the period 1989-90 to 2002-03.
The main industries contributing to 2002-03 total factor income are the services industries, namely property and business services, ownership of dwellings, finance and insurance, wholesale trade, and retail trade. In addition, the construction and manufacturing industries are significant contributors to total factor income.
There are also differing industry impacts in each state in total factor income. The Northern Territory and Western Australia are dominated by the mining industry while the Australian Capital Territory has strong property and business services and government administration and defence industries.
Gross Household Disposable Income
The analysis of GSP per capita above concentrates on the level of economic production (GSP) and its growth in current price terms. It does not provide a measure of incomes received by residents of a particular state, because a proportion of income generated in the production process may be transferred to other states or overseas (and conversely income may be received from other states or overseas). A measure that takes these flows into account is gross household disposable income per capita which is shown below.
Gross household disposable income per capita in 2002-03 was highest in the Australian Capital Territory and lowest in Tasmania. Differences between the states reflect differences, from state to state, in the impact of a range of factors including the average level of compensation of employees received per employee, the proportion of the population in employment, the age distribution of the population, and differences in the level of dwelling rent (including that imputed to owner occupiers). For example, a significant reason for the high level of gross household disposable income per capita in the Australian Capital Territory compared with other states is that the labour force participation rate is much higher there than in the rest of Australia.
These documents will be presented in a new window.