Papers of the Regional Science Association

, Volume 43, Issue 1, pp 45–57 | Cite as

Simulation properties of a regional interindustry econometric model

  • Richard S. ConwayJr.


Unfortunately, we do not know how closely WPSM simulates the regional impact process, since we cannot observe the economy's “true” multipliers. Nor are we on sound empirical grounds for concluding that WPSM's simulation properties are necessarily superior to those of other state models, such as the static input-output formulation.

Nevertheless, considering WPSM's economic structure, which has been subjected to an array of empirical tests, the model is an appealing tool for impact analysis. In spite of its current shortcomings, WPSM's four-way accounting of the dynamic behavior of output, income, expenditures, and employment within an interindustry framework offers three attractive attibutes: an explicit, logical, yet flexible structure; a detailed and comprehensive coverage of economic variables; and internally consistent projections. Drawing upon a pool of time-series and cross-section data WPSM attempts to combine the best features of more traditional specifications of regional econometric and input-output models.


Dynamic Behavior Good Feature Empirical Test Econometric Model Economic Structure 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Adams, F. G., C. Brooking, and N. J. Glickman. “On the Specification and Simulation of a Regional Econometric Model: A Model of Mississippi,”Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 57 (1975), pp. 286–298.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Almon, C., Jr., M. B. Buckler, L. M. Horwitz, and T. C. Reimbold.1985:Interindustry Forecasts of the American Economy. Lexington, Mass: Lexington Books, 1974.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Bell, F. W. “An Econometric Forecasting Model for a Region,”Journal of Regional Science, Vol. 7 (1967), pp. 109–127.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Beyers, W. B., P. J. Bourque, W. R. Seyfried, and E. E. Weeks. “Input-Output Tables for the Washington Economy,” Graduate School of Business Administration, University of Washington, Seattle, 1970.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Bourque, P. J., and R. S. Conway, Jr. “The 1972 Washington Input-Output Study,” Graduate School of Business Administration, University of Washington, Seattle, 1977.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    —, and C. T. Howard. “The Washington Projection and Simulation Model,” Graduate School of Business Administration, University of Washington, Seattle, 1977.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    ——, and E. Weeks, “Detailed Input-Output Tables for Washington, State, 1963,” Washington State University, Pullman, 1969.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Conway, R. S., Jr. “The Hawaii Population and Economic Forecasting Model,” Working Paper, State of Hawaii Department of Planning and Economic Development, Honolulu, 1977.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Conway, R. S., Jr. “The Aluminum Industry in Washington State: Jobs, Income, and Electrical Energy,” Working Paper, Washington State Department of Commerce and Economic Development, 1978.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    —— “International Trade and the Washington State Economy: The Impact of Foreign Exports, 1963–1985,” Washington State Department of Commerce and Economic Development, Olympia, 1978.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Conway, R. S., Jr., and C. T. Howard. “A Forecasting Model for Regional Housing Investment,”Journal of Regional Science, Vol. 20 (1980).Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Crow, R. T. “A Nationally Linked Regional Econometric Model,”Journal of Regional Science, Vol. 13 (1973), pp. 187–204.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Emerson, M. J.Interindustry Projections of the Kansas Economy. Topeka: State of Kansas, 1971.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Glickman, N. J.Econometric Analysis of Regional Systems. New York: Academic Press, 1977.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Governor's Ad Hoc Executive Water Emergency Committee. “The 1976–1977 Drought in Washington State,” Office of the Governor, Washington State, Olympia, 1978.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Hall, O. P., and J. A. Licari. “Building Small Region Econometric Models: Extension of Glickman's Structure to Los Angeles,”Journal of Regional Science, Vol. 14 (1974), pp. 337–353.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    L'Esperance, W. L., A. E. King, and R. H. Sines. “Conjoining an Ohio Input-Output Model with an Econometric Model of Ohio,” presented at the 22nd annual meeting of the Regional Science Association, 1975.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Preston, R. S.The Wharton Annual and Industry Forecasting Model. Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 1972.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Tiebout, C. M. “An Empirical Regional Input-Output Projection Model: The, State of Washington 1980,”Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 51 (1969), pp. 334–340.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.The Structure of the U.S. Economy in 1980 and 1985. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Labor, 1975.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Regional Science Association 1979

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard S. ConwayJr.
    • 1
  1. 1.Washington State Department of Commerce and Economic DevelopmentUSA

Personalised recommendations