Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Negatives in symmetric input–output tables: the impossible quest for the Holy Grail

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
The Annals of Regional Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the Supply-Use (or Make-Use) input–output models, “product-technology” (PT) or “fixed-industry-sales-structure” (FISS) assumptions are more widely adopted (SNA, Eurostat) for deriving symmetric input–output tables (SIOT) than “industry-technology” or “fixed-product-sales-structure” assumptions, but generate negatives in the SIOT. A SIOT deduced from the Supply-Use model is considered as satisfactory as soon as it contains no more negatives; scholars have focused on the negatives in the SIOT and on how to remove them. However, as a SIOT may include no negatives even if there are some negatives in the inverse Supply matrix, we have completely reversed the reasoning. A counter-example demonstrates that computing the inverse Supply matrix, as imposed by PT or FISS assumptions, is mathematically a nonsense operation even when the symmetric input–output tables do not include any negative; this result is new. Hence, deriving a SIOT under PT or FISS assumption must be rejected. Three applications are provided: Austria 2000 and 2005 and USA 2007.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aidenoff A (1970) Input–output data in the United Nations System of National Accounts. In: Carter AP, Brody A (eds) Applications of input–output analysis, North Holland; reprinted in Ira Sohn, Ed., 1986, Readings in input–output analysis. Theory and Applications. Oxford University Press, New York: 130–150

  • Almon C (1970) Investment in input–output models and the treatment of secondary products. In: Carter AP, Brody A (eds) Applications of input–output analysis North-Holland. Amsterdam, London: 103–116

  • Almon C (2000) Product-to-product tables via product technology with no negative flows. Econ Syst Res 12(1): 27–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson AW, Manning TW (1983) The use of input–output analysis in evaluating water resource development. Can J Agric Econ 31(1): 15–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Almon C (1970) Technology assumptions in the construction of U.K. input–output tables. In: Allen RIG, Gossling WF (eds) Estimating and projecting input–output coefficients. Input-Output Publishing, London: 68–93

  • Bohlin L, Widell LM (2006) Estimation of commodity-by-commodity input–output matrices. Econ Syst Res 18(2): 205–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braibant M (2002) Transformation of Supply and Use tables to symmetric input–output tables. In: 14th Conference on Input–Output techniques, Montreal, 10–15 October 2002

  • BEA (2008) Interactive Access to Input–Output Accounts Data, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Last updated 15 December 2008. http://www.bea.gov/industry/iotables/table_list.cfm?anon=97514

  • Comer JC, Jackson RW (2003) A note on adjusting national input–output data for regional table construction. J Reg Sci 37(1): 145–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Mesnard L (2004) Understanding the shortcomings of commodity-based technology in input–output models: an economic-circuit approach. J Reg Sci 44(1): 125–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Mesnard L (2009) Is the Ghosh model interesting?. J Reg Sci 49(2): 361–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dietzenbacher E (1997) In vindication of the Ghosh Model: a reinterpretation as a price model. J Reg Sci 37(4): 629–651

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dietzenbacher E, van der Linden JA (1997) Sectoral and spatial linkages in the EC production structure. J Reg Sci 37(2): 235–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eding G, Oosterhaven J, de Vet B, Nijmeijer H (1999) Constructing regional supply and use tables: Dutch experiences. In: Hewings GJD, Sonis M, Madden M, Kimura Y (eds) Understanding and interpreting economic structure. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Eurostat (2008) Eurostat manual of Supply, Use and input–output tables

  • Forestry Department (1998) Economic and environmental accounting for forestry: status and current efforts. Planning and Statistics Branch, Policy and Planning Division

  • Garcia-Negro, MC, Doldán-Garcia XR, Chas-Amil ML, Zotes-Tarrío Y, Carballo-Penela A, Nogueira-Moure E, Villasante-Larramendi S (2004) Application of input–output methods for the study of the Galician fishing in 1999. Input–output and global equilibrium: data, modeling, and policy analysis, Brussels, 2–4 September 2004

  • Gilchrist DA, StLouis LV, Harper DJ (2000) An examination of the Leontief and Ghoshian price and quantity models: a rectangular approach. Roneo, January 2000

  • Guo J, Lawson AM, Planting MA (2002) From Make-Use to Symmetric I-O Tables: An Assessment of Alternative Technology Assumption. Bureau of Economic Analysis, WP2002-03

  • Guo J, Planting MA (2007) Integrating U.S. Input–output tables with SNA: valuations and extensions. In: 16th International input–output conference in Istanbul, Turkey, 2–7 July

  • Harris RID, Aying L (1998) Input–output modelling of the urban and regional economy: the importance of external trade. Reg Stud 32(9): 851–862

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoekstra R (2005) Economic growth, material flows and the environment: new applications of structural decomposition analysis and physical input–output tables. Edward Edgar publishing, Glos, UK

  • Horowitz KJ, Planting MA (2009) Concepts and Methods of the U.S. Input–Output Accounts, Bureau of Economic Analysis, US Department of Commerce, September 2006, updated April 2009

  • Israilevich PR, Hewings GJD, Sonis M, Schindler GR (1997) Forecasting structural change with a regional econometric input–output model. J Reg Sci 37(4): 565–590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson RW (1998) Regionalizing national commodity-by-industry accounts. Econ Syst Res 10(3): 223–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kop Jansen P, ten Raa T (1990) The choice of model in the construction of input–output matrices. Int Econ Rev 31: 213–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson AM (1997) Benchmark input–output accounts for the U.S. economy, 1992. Survey of Current Business, Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, November 1997, pp 36–82

  • Madsen B, Jensen-Butler C (1998) Commodity balance and interregional trade: make and use approaches to interregional modelling. Paper presented to the 12th International conference on input–output techniques, New York, 18–22 May 1998

  • Manrique-de-Lara-Peñate C, Langa-Seva MC, Santos-Peñate D (2008) Application of IO models to Use and Destination Tourism Accounts. In: The 2008 International input–output meeting, input–output & environment, Seville, 9–11 July

  • Mattey JP (1993) Evidence on input–output technology assumptions from the Longitudinal Research Database. Discussion paper 93-8, Center for Economic Studies, US Bureau of Economic Census, Washington, DC

  • Mattey JP, ten Raa T (1997) Primary versus secondary production techniques in US manufacturing. Rev Income Wealth 43: 449–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller RE, Blair PD (1985) Input–output analysis: foundations and extensions. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller RE, Blair PD (2009) Input–output analysis: Foundations and Extensions, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nijmeijer H, de Vet B, Eding G (1999) Screening the Dutch Regional Accounts: Experiences from the Regional Input–Output Project. Draft Report, Statistics Netherlands

  • Oosterhaven J (1984) A family of square and rectangular interregional input–output tables and models. Reg Sci Urban Econ 14: 565–582

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perez J, Dones M, Llano C (2009) An interregional impact analysis of the EU structural funds in Spain (1995–1999). Papers in Regional Science

  • Rainer N (1989) Descriptive versus analytical Make-Use systems: some Austrian experiences. In: Miller RE, Polenske KR, Rose AR (eds) Frontiers of input–output analysis, Oxford University Press, New York: 50–64

  • Rainer N, Richter J (1992) Some aspects of the analytical use of descriptive make and absorption tables. Econ Syst Res 4: 159–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravetz J (2004) Measuring regional sustainable development. A review of modeling tools in the UK. Eco-region NW, A BiffaWard project on sustainable resource use

  • Rueda-Cantuche JM, Beutel J, Neuwahl F, Mongelli I, Loeschel A (2009) A symmetric input–output table for EU27: latest progress. Econ Syst Res 21(1): 59–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sayapova A, Slobodyanik S (2008) Compilation of regional input–output tables in Russia. In: The 2008 international input–output meeting, input–output & environment, Seville, 9–11 July 2008

  • Schaffer W (1999) Regional Impact Models, Regional Research Institute, West Virginia University

  • Shao G, Miller RE (1990) Demand-side and supply-side commodity-industry multiregional input–output models and spatial linkages in the US regional economy. Econ Syst Res 2: 385–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siddiqi YM, Salem M (1995) Regionalization of commodity-by-industry input–output accounts: the Canadian Case. Statistics Canada

  • Statistics Austria (2009) National Accounts. Compiled on 12 February 2009. - NACE/CPA 11 incl. 13 (http://www.statistik.at/web_en/statistics/national_accounts/input_output_statistics/index.html).

  • Steenge AE (1990) The commodity technology revisited: theoretical basis and an application to error location in the make-use framework. Econ Model 7: 376–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone R (1961) Input–output and national accounts. OECD, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Susiluoto I (1997) An input–output study of regional economic growth: The Helsinki Region and the Rest of Finland. Studies Published by City of Helsinki Urban Facts, 1997:2

  • ten Raa T (1988) An alternative treatment of secondary products in input–output analysis: frustration. Rev Econ Stat 70(3): 535–538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ten Raa T (2005) The economics of input–output analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • ten Raa T, van der Ploeg R (1989) A statistical approach to the problem of negatives in input–output analysis. Econ Model 6: 2–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ten Raa T, Rueda-Cantuche JM (2003) The construction of Input–Output coefficients matrices in an axiomatic context: some further considerations. Econ Syst Res 15: 439–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ten Raa T, Rueda-Cantuche JM (2007) A generalized expression for the commodity and the industry technology models in input–output analysis. Econ Syst Res 19(1): 99–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (1968) A System of National Accounts (SNA), series F, No. 2, Rev. 3, United Nations Studies in method. United Nations Department Of Economic and Social Affairs, New York

  • United Nations (1999) Handbook of national accounting: input/output tables—compilation and analysis. United Nations Studies in method. United Nations Department Of Economic and Social Affairs, New York

  • United Nations (2001) System of National Accounts (1993). Statistics Division—National Accounts. (http://unstats.un.org/unsd/sna1993/tocLev8.asp?L1=15&L2=4).

  • van de Steeg AM, Steenge AE (2008) Integrating the TSA and input–output methodology in tourism impact studies. In: The 2008 International input–output meeting, input–output & environment, Seville, 9–11 July 2008

  • Wood R (2008) Development of a time series of Australian input–output tables and greenhouse emissions. In: The 2008 International input–output meeting, input–output & environment, Seville, 9–11 July 2008

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratoire d’Economie et de Gestion, University of Burgundy and CNRS, UMR 5118, 2 Bd Gabriel, Dijon, France

    Louis de Mesnard

  2. Regional Economics Application Laboratory, Urbana–Champaign, IL, USA

    Louis de Mesnard

Authors
  1. Louis de Mesnard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Louis de Mesnard.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

de Mesnard, L. Negatives in symmetric input–output tables: the impossible quest for the Holy Grail. Ann Reg Sci 46, 427–454 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-009-0332-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-009-0332-5

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation