Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Core and periphery in a three-region input-output framework

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

Abstract

This empirical interregional input-output study is focused on the Finnish economy which is divided into three sub-regions according to the core-periphery frame of reference. The data concerning them is provided by combining and supplementing three survey-based studies. Input-output method is applied both as a descriptive device and as an analytical tool in the scrutiny of this distinctive regional economic system. The domestic interregional feedback effects are found negligible in all three areas, and there is no straightforward correspondence between the size of the regional economy and that of the feedbacks. The justification for the use of the interregional approach in comparison with a single-region one is to be found in the analysis of spillovers which are considerable also in the present case. The potentials and limitations of the interregional input-output research are evaluated in order to determine its relevance in analysing regional development problems of a core-periphery type.

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

  1. Alapuro, R., “Finland: An Interface Periphery.” Research Group for Comparative Sociology, University of Helsinki, Research Reports NO. 25 (1980), Helsinki.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Baster, J., “Stability and Trade Patterns in Regional Input-Output Tables,”Urban Studies (1980), 71–75.

  3. Batten, D. F.,Spatial Analysis of Interacting Economies, Kluwer-Nijhoff 1982.

  4. Batten, D. F., “On the dynamics of industrial evolution,”Regional Science & Urban Economics, 12 (1982), 3, 449–463.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Beyers, W. B., “On the Structure and Development of Multiregional Economic Systems,”Papers of the Regional Science Association 40 (1978), 109–133.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Central Statistical Office of Finland, Input-Output Study.The Input-Output Structure of the Finnish Economy 1970. (In Finnish with English Summary), Helsinki 1977.

  7. Chalmers, J. A., E. J. Andersson, T. Beckhelm and W. Hannigan, “Spatial Interaction in Sparsely Populated Regions: An Hierarchic Economic Base Approach,”International Regional Science Review 3 (1978), 75–92.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Conway, R. S.Jr., “Changes in Regional Input-Output Coefficients and Regional Forecasting,”Regional Science and Urban Economics 10 (1980), 1, 153–171.

    Google Scholar 

  9. DiPasquale, D. and K. Polenske, “Output, Income and Employment Input-Output Multipliers,” in Pleeter, S. (ed.) Economic Impact Analysis: Methodology and Applications, 85–113,Studies in Applied Regional Science 19, Martinus Nijhoff (1980).

  10. Edwards, S. L. and I. R. Gordon, “The application of input-output methods to regional forecasting: the British Experience,” in Chisholm, M. A., A. E. Frey and P. Haggett (eds.)Regional Forecasting, 415–430. Colston Papers 22, London 1971.

  11. Emerson, M. J., “Interregional Trade Effects in Static and Dynamic Input-Output Models,” in Polenske, K. R. and J. V. Skolka (eds.)Advances in Input-Output Analysis, 263–177. Cambridge, Mass., 1976.

  12. Eskelinen, H., “Findings on Input-Output in a Small Area Context,”The Annals of Regional Science, XVII (1983), 1, 40–55.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Eskelinen, H., The North Karelian Input-Output Studies of the 1970's (in Finnish, mimeo). Publications of Karelian Institute, University of Joensuu, Joensuu 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Eskelinen, H. and R. Sullström, “A Three-Region Input-Output Study,” in Eskelinen, H. (ed.), Regional Economy as the Object of Study-Methods and Applications (in Finnish, mimeo). Publications of Karelian Institute, University of Joensuu, Joensuu 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Galtung, J.,A Structural Theory of Imperialism. Prio Publications 17–1. Oslo 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ghosh, A., “Input-Output Approach to an Allocative System,”Economica 25 (1958), 58–64.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Granberg, A., “On Using Input-Output Models in Studying the Territorial Proportions of the USSR,” in Kuklinski, A., O. Kultalahti and B. Koskiaho (eds.)Regional Dynamics of Socioeconomic Change, 69–82. University of Tampere and Finnpublishers, Tampere 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Greytak, D., “Regional Impact in Input-Output Analysis,”Papers and Proceedings of the RSA, 25 (1970), 203–217.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Isard, W., “Interregional and Regional Input-Output Analysis: A Model of a Space-economy,”Review of Economics and Statistics, 33 (1951), 318–328.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Issaev, B., P. Nijkamp, P. Rietveld and F. Snickars,Multiregional Economic Modeling: Practice and Prospect. North Holland 1982.

  21. Jensen, R. C., “An Introspective Evaluation of the Regional Input-Output Technique,”Paper to the First World Regional Science Congress, Cambridge, Mass., 1980 (mimeo).

  22. Jensen, R. C., T. D. Mandeville and N. D. Karunaratne,Regional Economic Planning, Groom Helm, London 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kiljunen, K. “Finland in the International Division of Labour,” in Seers, D., Schaffer, B., Kiljunen, M. L. (eds.)Underdeveloped Europe. Studies in Core-Periphery Relations, 279–302, The Harvester Press, 1979.

  24. Miller, R. E., “Interregional Feedbacks in Input-Output Models: Some Experimental Results,”Western Economic Journal 7 (1969), 41–50.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Oosterhaven, J.,Interregional Input-Output and Dutch Regional Policy Problems, Gower, 1981.

  26. Paelinck, J. and P. Nijkamp,Operational Theory and Method in Regional Economics, Lexington, 1975.

  27. Palomäki, M., “Industrial Development and Regional Standards of Living in Finland,” in Walker, D. (ed.),Planning Industrial Development, John Wiley, 1980.

  28. Raumolin, J., “Development Problems in the Scandinavian Periphery,”IFDA Dossier 22, March/April, 1981.

  29. Riefler, R. F., “Interregional Input-Output: A State of the Arts Survey,” in Judge, G. C. and Takayama, T. (eds.),Studies in Economic Planning Over Space and Time, Vol. 1, 122–182, North Holland, 1976.

  30. Seers, D., “Introduction,” in Seers, D., B. Schaffer and M. L. Kiljunen (eds.),Underdeveloped Europe. Studies in Core-Periphery Relations, xiii-xxi, The Harvester Press, 1979.

  31. Selwyn, P., “Some Thoughts on Cores and Peripheries,” in Seers, D., B. Schaffer and M. L. Kiljunen (eds.),Underdeveloped Europe. Studies in Core-Periphery Relations, 35–43, The Harvester Press, 1979.

  32. Späth, H.,Cluster Analysis Algorithms for Data Reduction and Classification of Objects, Ellis Horwood Limited, 1979.

  33. Varjonen, S., “Greater Helsinki Input-Output Study,” (in Finnish).Publications of the Planning Department of the Office of the Council of State, Helsinki, 1977.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Social Science Council, Academy of Finland, Finland

    Heikki Eskelinen

Authors
  1. Heikki Eskelinen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Eskelinen, H. Core and periphery in a three-region input-output framework. Ann Reg Sci 17, 41–56 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01287471

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01287471

Keywords

Search

Navigation