«Jonathan Haskel Imperial College Business School, CEPR, Ceriba, IZA and UK-IRC Keywords: copyright, IP, innovation, knowledge, investment, ...»
5.2. TV & Radio Outsourcing For television, estimation requires consideration of the increasing trend to outsource production to the independent sector. One potential way of addressing this is to make use of firm- and/or household-level microdata, to estimate the input of relevant occupations, across organisations and industries. The drawback of this technique is that it can make disaggregation by asset category more difficult and does not ensure that the measured output is in fact asset creation covered by copyright. For instance, a writer allocated to the industry ‘Artistic and Literary Creation’ (92.31 in SIC03) may produce books, and/or scripts for television, and/or scripts for films, and/or articles in short-lived publications. Ideally such a method should include some explicit or implicit assumption on what percentage of time is devoted to asset creation rather than the production of short-lived goods.
Because of the need to identify actual assets, rather than occupations who may be involved in asset creation for some proportion of their time, we feel the best approach for TV & Radio is to identify the investments in content creation by UK broadcasters, whether they be in-house productions or commissioned from the UK independent sector. In the case of commissions, the costs of the funding broadcaster may not be sufficient since some proportion of the asset rights remain with the independent producer, providing the incentive for additional investment by the independent. This issue is prevalent throughout the creative sector and for almost all of the assets we consider in this report.
Other issues for measurement of GFCF in this asset type include the rental of copyrighted assets in the production of television assets, and the scope and divisibility of the final original.
These are already discussed above in the context of film.
5.3 Books As in the case of TV & Radio, the use of firm- and/or household-level microdata is an option but may make it difficult to accurately split GFCF estimates by asset type, and does not ensure that the output is an asset that is covered by copyright. The best way to address this would appear to be the use of data on royalty payments including those mediated by the Collecting Societies.
5.4 Music For Music, the use of firm- and/or household-level microdata would present potential data issues similar to those for Books. Therefore the superior data source would again appear to be data on royalty payments mediated by Collecting Societies.
5.5. Other Miscellaneous Artwork (Photography, Choreography, Art) Identification of productive fixed assets In the case of Miscellaneous Art, it is important to ensure correct identification of productive assets and avoid double-counting with assets already included in the National Accounts. This is discussed in greater detail in Appendix 1, in the context of valuables, where we argue that the potential for double-counting is limited. ‘Miscellaneous Artwork’ is included in the framework developed by Soloveichik (2010), where it is estimated at 7.7% of total US investment in artistic originals. UK investment in such assets may be considerable, and complete exclusion has implications for the quality of the final estimates. Data on royalty payments (e.g. for images and potentially art) would be useful, since they ensure, by definition, that the asset counted is being commercially exploited and estimation could be restricted to only those goods that have a service life of greater than one year.
5.6 Summary Despite Table 1 showing that UK GFCF in originals is among the highest in the EEA, discussion of the recommendations advocated by Eurostat and the OECD highlights a number of identifiable gaps in the UK asset coverage. We suggest ways of building on ONS measurement as a means to improve current estimates in the National Accounts. We intend to collaborate with the ONS on this issue in the near future, with new estimates largely based on the contents of this report.
6. The current UK National Accounts: GFCF in Artistic Originals
Overview of UK estimates and their composition The current UK estimates for GFCF in copyright/artistic originals, as included in the National
Accounts, are made up of 3 components:
- artistic originals; broadcasting & recording, private sector
- entertainment, literary and artistic originals by public corporations
- artistic originals, publishing industry Before looking at each of these in turn, it is worth considering a definitional point. The second category is entitled ‘entertainment, literary and artistic originals by public corporations’, and uses data on a small sample of UK-based production companies. Within the UK, examples of channels that could be used are the BBC, Channel 4 and S4C. Our data for this category is drawn from public sources (OFCOM reports). We note that we include the BBC as a public corporation The BBC was re-classified from a public corporation (market sector) to general government (non-market sector) in 2006, when the ONS re-classified the BBC licence fee from a service charge to a tax. S4C was also re-allocated to general government since it is funded directly by DCMS. 17 Our definition of the market sector for this (and our accompanying) report(s), that is sections A-K & OP (SIC2003). Or put another way, the whole economy excluding Public Administration & Defence; Education & Health, 18 in line with the definition used in EUKLEMS.
ONS estimates, by broad National Accounts category Figure 2 presents current price (CP) GFCF for each of the three components of GFCF in artistic originals, as recorded in the National Accounts.
Figure 2: Total GFCF in Artistic Originals, by broad category: broadcasting, recording and publishing, public and private sectors, (CP, £mns) For the BBC, the reasoning behind the change was that, because of its compulsory nature, the licence fee should be recorded as a tax rather than a service charge. Additionally, S4C is funded directly by DCMS. The ONS Press Release that accompanied this change in classification can be found at http://www.statistics.gov.uk/pdfdir/cpst0106.pdf Therefore we will also be excluding from the market sector those parts of Education and Health that are delivered privately.
Note to figure: The solid bold line represents total investment in artistic originals. Its three broad components are also shown, with the unbroken black line being private sector investment in broadcasting and recording originals. The dashed line is investment in artistic originals by public broadcasting corporations. The dotted line represents investment in artistic originals by (book) publishers. Exact details of underlying data and the calculation are provided in section 1.1.
The data show that in 2002, 19 nominal UK investment in artistic originals was £2.14bn. In the same year nominal UK CP GDP at market prices was £1,076bn. Therefore investment in artistic originals represented 0.20% of whole economy GDP, compared to 0.62% in the US.
In Figure 2, the series for total investment in artistic originals is dominated by private sector investment in broadcasting and recording originals, that is, private sector investment in television & radio and music recordings. Of these two components, broadcasting is by far the dominant figure. To emphasise just how much, in 2010 it made up 93% of estimated private sector investment in broadcasting and recording originals, and 67% of total GFCF in Artistic Originals as recorded in the National Accounts.
The details of calculation, for each of the three main categories and their sub-components, are summarised in the separate paper. Here we provide some overall comments.
6.1. Artistic Originals; Private Sector Broadcasting & Recording Data for 2002 have been chosen simply to provide a comparison with breakdowns produced by the BEA (Soloveichik, 2010). The corresponding data for 2008 show investment of £3,179m, GDP @ market prices of £1,448,391m, meaning investment in artistic originals represented 0.22% of whole economy GDP.
6.1.1. Private sector broadcasting The largest sub-component within this series is the data for private sector broadcasting. The ONS method is based on inputs costs for “stock” (long lasting ) progammes with costs for flow programs subtracted off. In addition, these costs are then marked up to capture monopoly power in artistic creation, with an implied mark-up in 2008 of 3.5.
It should be noted that the data do not currently cover stock productions costs for new digital channels though these providers invest relatively small amounts in the production of UK originals, and mainly broadcast imported material not owned in the UK.
Finally, although data for the public corporations (discussed below) likely include radio broadcasting, there are no data for private/commercial radio within the estimates for private sector broadcasting. We feel that this is the correct treatment, since much of the output of such stations should be regarded as either flow programmes, or rentals from the existing capital stock for music originals, rather than the creation of a new asset.
6.1.2. Recording or Musical Originals GFCF is estimated as a percentage of sales of recorded media. Rather than being based on ONS Retail Sales data, the sales figure is from an external source (British Phonographic Industry). There are a number of issues here. First, the sales of recordings has likely fallen in recent years : the he industry reaction to counteract this has been to increase the prices for live performance to replace lost revenues (Soloveichik, 2010).
Note that like merchandising and sales of copies, live performance activity is not investment in itself, but rather rental from the existing capital stock. That is, performers will pay themselves an implicit rental from the percentage of ticket revenues they receive. But if the method to obtain investment is to assume revenues from music originals as a percentage of
downstream activity, then an improved estimate would be as follows:
GFCF(REC) = λ(SALES) + θ(LIVE REVENUES)
Second, note that sales royalties flow to record labels as well as artists, songwriters and publishers. A constant factor of sales, λ, implicitly assumes that they all flow to artists. 20 Therefore the true value of λ is likely higher. The current exclusion of live performance Note that conceptually the correct sales figure to use is that of ‘worldwide sales for copies of UK assets’, rather than ‘UK sales for copies of worldwide assets’. However, the latter is all that is available.
revenues is particularly significant in the current industry environment, where such revenues are being used to make up for lost revenues from sales of recordings. The market is large in terms of revenue, comparable to that for recordings. The proportion of live revenues paid to artists and songwriters (θ) is also high. It should be noted that the income artists earn from live performance is ‘mixed income’. That is it implicitly includes a return for labour as well as a return to their asset(s). Therefore the implied royalties could be adjusted to account for this, either using some estimate of the opportunity cost for the time of artists as an estimated return to labour, or using the average ratio of ‘Compensation of Employees’ to ‘Gross Operating Surplus’ Further capital income is earned from performance and synchronisation royalties, among others. The split between artists/record labels/songwriters/publishers depends on the particular right in question. 21 These are primarily distributed by the collecting societies: PRS (Performance Rights Society) and PPL (formerly Phonographic Performance Limited).
6.2 Entertainment literary and artistic originals; Public Corporations The main question here is whether the data take sufficient account of the increased practice of contracting out production of new programmes. For instance from our discussions with the BBC we know that it is committed to filling 50% of its broadcast hours from in-house productions, 25% of hours from the independent sector, with the remainder competed for and allocated between the independent sector and its in-house divisions. 22 Overall the general principle of estimating GFCF using production costs is reasonable. Note that the estimates for public corporations include no allowance for monopoly power unlike the data for private sector broadcasting. This is relevant since revenues from copyrighted stock programmes must surely have increased in recent years, with the introduction of new digital channels whose output is completely made up of broadcasts of already exiting originals.
6.2.3. Film We review the data for Film within public broadcasting corporations since that is where it fits into the ONS framework. The data show that in 2010, the estimated total investment in UKowned film originals was around £33m. A comparative series from OFCOM on the production costs of Film, incurred by the Public Service Broadcasters (PSBs) suggests a We are extremely grateful to Will Page and Chris Carey of ‘PRS for Music’ for valuable insights into the structure of the music industry.
We are grateful to Shaun Day, Rowena Goldman and Julia Read of the BBC for information on the structure of the television industry and of the BBC itself.
figure of around £200m for the same year. Although the series for the PSBs is likely closer to a truer estimate of UK investment than that from the ONS, the OFCOM expenditure data may include PSB rentals of non-UK productions. If it does include such rentals, they should be subtracted before use in any estimation of GFCF.
6.3. Publishing We turn now to the third (dotted) line in Figure 2: GFCF in book publishing. The method used by the ONS is similar to that used in the recording industry. GFCF is estimated as a percentage of sales, which corresponds to an approximation of the royalty rate received by authors for the sale of paperbacks. With regard to the sales data, newspapers, magazines and other short-lived goods should be excluded since they do not meet the capitalisation criteria.
Therefore the sales figure should refer only to Books (and Maps). Data for the resulting GFCF in literary originals are shown below in Figure 9.
Figure 3: Publishing: GFCF
Source: ONS, based on a percentage of book sales As with music originals, this method does not yield a representative estimate of investment.