Abstract
This paper describes how we transformed the 2002 Ugandan Supply Use Table (SUT) into the required structure of a database for the static Ugandan CGE model Dixon et al. (ORANI: A multisectoral model of the Australian economy, 1982). We describe the unique features captured in the Ugandan SUT as well as that of the CGE database. We highlight the structural differences of the published data and that of the CGE database. In describing the SUT we identify data issues, such as negative capital rentals and omitted data entries that had to be addressed before the database could be constructed. The ideas put forward in this paper describe, in a pragmatic manner, not only how to transform published data into a CGE database, but also how to create an additional sector in the CGE database. For the Ugandan CGE database, we created an additional Oil sector.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
At the time of writing this paper, Uganda’s most recent SUT and SAM are for the year 2006. In these data only one mining commodity is specified, namely “Mining and Quarrying”, which contributes less than 1 % of total domestic output.
The SALTER model was developed in Australia to provide insights to the effects of trade policy between Australia and it’s near trading partners through the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Group (Zeitsch et al. 1991; Jomini et al. 1994). It is the basis for the well-known GTAP model and database (Hertel 1997).
The use of commodities includes intermediate, investment, consumption, government, stocks and exports.
A description of the creation of GTAP and its links to the Australian Salter project is described in Powell (2007).
For details on the version of GTAP databases see: https://www.gtap.agecon.purdue.edu/databases/default.asp.
In keeping with the GEMPACK naming convention, underscore S (_S) implies that the data is summed over source, that is, the published data does not distinguish between domestic and imported sources in the use table.
Note that the number of industries and commodities may differ between a SUT and SAM. Depending on the dimensions in the model, the modeller will disaggregate the appropriate wage bill matrix. Traditionally the SUT includes more commodities and industries than the SAM and therefore includes more detail on the supply and use of commodities.
In Fig. 3, the sets defined for each matrix are listed under or next to the heading called “Size”.
The Ugandan Supply table shows margin commodities as goods road transport, railway transport, retail trade, wholesale trade, retail sale of automotive fuel and the sale of motor vehicles.
Based on the 2002 SUT, the value of margins is approximately 2,087 billion shillings and GDP at market price 11,811 billion shillings. Thus, (2,087\(\backslash \)11,811)*100 = 17.67 %.
Data from the GTAP database for other East Africa countries suggests a more even split between capital and labour. Examples of the labour\(\backslash \)capital distributions are: Ethiopia 54:46, Malawi 53:47, Tanzania 50:50, Uganda 53:47 and Zambia 51:49 (Narayanan and Walmsley 2008).
This calculation excludes those industries with negative value added values. Negative value added occurs when capital rentals records large negative values that exceed that of labour payments.
The Centre of Policy Studies Archive contains a number of technical notes, presentations, programs and databases that may be useful in creating country-specific databases. (http://www.copsmodels.com/archivep.htm).
Land refers to cultivated land area, forests and natural resources such as minerals, coal, gold and oil. In the database, only agricultural and mining industries use land.
The basic values of imports in the Uganda database are the commodity-specific c.i.f valuations inclusive of tariffs.
For example, direct use of transport is when a person buys a bus ticket and use the bus as a form of transport. When transport is used as a margin, it facilitates the movement of commodities to the final users. In the first case, the bus ticket is billed separately whereas in the second case, the margin is included in the purchasers” price of the commodity.
The mining industries are: (1) mining of non-ferrous metal ores, except uranium and thorium, (2) quarrying of stone, sand and clay, (3) extraction of salt and (4) other mining and quarrying N.E.C. There is only one mining commodity, namely Mining and quarrying.
The Petroleum sector is already accounted for in the SUT.
There may be alternative sales structures. For example, some part of the crude oil commodity could directly be exported. If data on a different sales structure becomes available, we can easily change the automated data program.
References
Alarcon, J., Baryahirwa, S., Bahemuka, S., van Heemst, J., Kasirye, I., & Rudaherwanwa, N., et al. (2006). Social Acounting Matric Uganda 2002. Project Report: Output, procedures and methodology. EPRC/ISS/UBOS.
Brown, S., Strzelecki, A., & Watts, G. (1993). Matching input–output data to international trade data and assembling a salter database, Salter Wroking Paper No. 19. Industry Commission, Canberra, December.
Dixon, P. B., Parmenter, B. R., Sutton, J., & Vincent, D. P. (1982). ORANI: A multisectoral model of the australian economy. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Harrison, W. J., & Pearson, R. K. (1996). Computing solutions for large general equilibrium models using GEMPACK. Computational Economics, 9, 83–127.
Hertel, T.W. (Ed.). (1997). Global trade analysis: modeling and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Horridge, J. M. (2011). Four ways to RAS in GEMPACK, Zip file TPMH0093. Melbourne: Centre of Policy Studies, Victoria University.
Horridge, J. M., Parmenter, B. R., & Pearson, K. R. (1993). Orani-F: A general equilibrium model of the australian economy. Economic and Financial Computing, 3(2), 71–140.
Jomini, P., McDougall, R., Watts, G., Dee, P.S. (1994). The SALTER model of the world economy: model structure, database and parameters. Salter Working Paper No. 24, Industry Commission, Canberra, Australia.
Narayanan, G. B., Aguiar, A., & McDougall, R. (Eds.). (2012). Global trade, assistance, and production: The GTAP 8 Data Base. Center for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue University, West Lafayette.
Narayanan, G. B., & Walmsley, T. L. (Eds.). (2008). Global trade, assistance, and production: The GTAP 7 Data Base. Center for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue University, West Lafayette.
Powell, A.A. (2007). Why, how and when did GTAP happen? What has it achieved? Where is it heading? GTAP Working Paper No. 38. Center for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue University, West Lafayette.
Roos, E. L., & Giesecke, J. A. (2014). The economic effects of lowering HIV incidence in South Africa: A CGE analysis. Economic Modelling, 39, 123–137.
Ugandan Social Accounting Matrix (SAM). (2002). Ugandan Bureau of Statistics. Kampala.
Ugandan Supply Use Table (SUT). (2002). Ugandan Bureau of Statistics. Kampala.
United Nations. (2009). System of National Accounts 2008. http://unstats.un.org/unsd/publication/SeriesF/SeriesF_74E.pdf. Accessed June 2012.
United Nations. (1999). Handbook of input–output table compilation and analysis. Series F, No. 74. Department for Economic and Social Affairs, Statistics Division.
Zeitsch, J., McDougall, R., Jomini, P., Welsh, A., Hambley, S., Brown, S., & Kelly, J. (1991). SALTER: A general equilibrium model of the world economy. Salter Working Paper No. 4, Industry Commission, Canberra, December.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Roos, E.L., Adams, P.D. & van Heerden, J.H. Constructing a CGE Database Using GEMPACK for an African Country. Comput Econ 46, 495–518 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10614-014-9468-1
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10614-014-9468-1