Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Impacts of Aggregation on Relative Performances of Nonsurvey Updating Techniques And Intertemporal Stability of Input–Output Coefficients

  • Published:
Economic Change and Restructuring Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In many instances, and for variety of reasons, input–output researchers are compelled to both employ mechanical techniques to update older survey-based tables as well as using more aggregated ones. This combination, however, gives rise to several concerns. The present paper is an attempt to investigate two such questions. First, the effects of aggregation on the accuracy ranking of selected updating methods, and second, the effects of aggregation on intertemporal stability of the input–output coefficients. To probe these issues, three updating methods were selected. These methods are NAÏVE or constant coefficient hypothesis, RAS or biproportional method, and LaGrangian optimization technique. Two survey-based tables from the former Soviet Union along with the selected updating techniques are used to generate updated target year’s direct and inverse transaction matrices at four aggregation levels. Comparison of the resultant estimates at these four levels of aggregation with their counterparts in the actual benchmark table reveals that a higher level of aggregation neither affects the rankings of the updating methods nor does it universally and unequivocally leads to a higher degree of intertemporal stability of input–output coefficients.

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

  • Ara K. (1959), The aggregation problem in I–O analysis. Econometrica 27:257–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blair P., Miller R. (1983), Spatial aggregation in multiregional input–output models. Environmental and Planning A 15:187–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bulmer-Thomas (1982), Input–Output Analysis in Developing Countries. John Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Butterfield M., Mules T., (1980), A testing routine for evaluating cell by cell accuracy in shortcut regional input–output tables. Journal of Regional Science, 20, 293–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cabrer B., Contreras D., Miravete E.J. (1991), Aggregation in input–output tables: how to select the best cluster linkage. Economic Systems Research, 3, 99–109

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter A.P. (1970). Structural Changes in the American Economy. Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Chakraborty D., ten Raa T. (1981), The aggregation problem in input–output analysis – a Survey. Artha Vijnana, 23(3–4): 326–344

    Google Scholar 

  • Comer J., Jackson R.W. (1997), A note on adjusting national input–output data for regional table construction, Journal of Regional Science, 37 (l):145–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crown W.H. (1987), An approach to estimating a consistent aggregate input–output Model. Growth and Change, 18 4, 1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crown W.H. (1990), An interregional perspective on aggregation bias and information loss in input–output analysis. Growth and Change 21(1): 11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dietzenbacher E. (1992), Aggregation in multisector models: using the Perron vector, Economic Systems Research 4(1): 3–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Doeksen G., Little C. (1968), Effect of size of input–output model on the results of an impact analysis. Agricultural Economic Research 20(4): 134–138

    Google Scholar 

  • Fei J.C.H. (1956), A fundamental theorem for the aggregation problem of input–output analysis. Econometrica 24:400–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher W.D. (1958), Criteria for aggregation in input–output analysis, Review of Economics and Statistics 40:250–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedlander D.. (1961), A technique for estimating a contingency table, given the marginal totals and some supplementary data. Journal of Royal Statistical Society Series A.123 (Part 3): 412–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallik, D.M., Guill, G.D., Kostinsky, B.L. and Vladimir, G. (1979), ‘The 1972 Input–Output table and the changing structure of the Soviet Economy in a Time of Change’, in Soviet Economy in a Time of Change, a compendium of papers submitted to the Joint Economic Committee Congress of the United States, Vol. I, Joint Committee Press

  • Gallik, D.M., Kostinsky, B.L. and Treml, V. (1983), ‘Input Output structure of the Soviet Economy 1972’, Foreign Economic Report Number 18, Washington, DC, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census

  • Garhart R.E., Giarratani F. (1987), Nonsurvey input–output estimation techniques: evidence on the structure of errors. Journal of Regional Science 27(2):245–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons J.C., Wolsky A., Tolley G. (1982), Approximate aggregation and error in input–output models. Resources and Energy 4(3):203–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green H.A.J. (1964), Aggregation in Economic Analysis. Princeton University Press, N.J

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrigan F., McGilvray J., McNicoll I. (1980), Simulating the structure of a regional economy, Environment and Planning A 12: 936–972

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison G.W., Manning R. (1987), Best approximate aggregation of input–output systems. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82(400):1027–1031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatanaka M.. (1952), A note on consolidation within a Leontief system, Econometrica, 20(2): 301–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hewings G.J.D. (1972), Input–output models: aggregation for regional impact analysis. Growth and Change 3(1):15–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howe, E.C. and Johnson, C.R. (1987), Linear Aggregation of Input–Output Models, Department of Economics, University of Saskatchewan

  • Ijiri Y. (1971), Fundamental queries in aggregation theory, Journal of the American Statistical Association 66:766–782

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Israilevich, P.R. (1986), Biproportional Forecasting of Input–Output Tables, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania

  • Isserman A.M. (1977), The location quotient approach to estimating regional economic impacts. AIP Journal 44:33–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Jalili, A.R. (1994), An Inquiry Into Non-Survey Techniques for Updating Input–Output Coefficients, Ph.D. dissertation, University of New Hampshire.

  • Jensen R.C. (1980), The concept of accuracy in regional input–output models, International Regional Science Review 5(2):139–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Karaska G.J. (1968), Variation of input–output coefficients for different levels of aggregation, Journal of Regional Science, 8(2): 215–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kossov, V. (1972), ‘The theory of aggregation in input–output models’, in Carter, A.P. and Brody, A. (eds), Contributions to Input–Output Analysis, Amsterdam, North-Holland

  • Kostinsky, B.L. (1976), ‘The reconstructed 1966 Soviet Input–Output Table: revised purchasers’ and Producers’ Prices Tables’, Foreign Economic Report number 13, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, September

  • Kymn K.O. (1990), Aggregation in input–output models: a comprehensive review, Economic Systems Research 2 (1): 65–93

    Google Scholar 

  • Lahr, M.L. and Stevens, B.H. (1987), ‘Sectoral aggregation in regional input–output models, concepts and problems’, Paper presented at the North American Meetings of Regional Science Association, November, Baltimore, Maryland

  • Lahr M.L., Stevens B.H. (2002). A study of the role of regionalization in the generation of aggregate error in regional input–output models. Journal of Regional Science, 42(3):477–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee K. (1997), Modeling economic growth in the UK: an econometric case for disaggregated sectoral analysis. Economic Modelling 14(3): 369–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee K.C., Pesaran M.H., Pierse R.G. (1990), Testing for aggregation bias in linear models, The Economic Journal, 100 (400):137–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leontief W. (1936), Quantitative input and output relations in the economic system of the United States. Review of Economic and Statistics 18:105–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leontief W. (1951). The Structure of American Economy 1919–1939.2. IASP publishing Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Lysko W.M. (1981), Effects of sector aggregation in an input–output table. Business Economics 16(4): 57–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Madsen B., Jensen-Butler C. (1999), Make and use approach to regional and interregional accounts and models. Economic System Research, 11(3):277–299

    Google Scholar 

  • Malinvand E. (1954), Aggregation problem in input–output models In: Bama T., (eds). The Structural Interdependence of the Economy. John Wiley and Sons, New Yourk, pp. 189–202

    Google Scholar 

  • McManuss M. 1956), On Hatanaka’s note on consolidation, Econometrica, 24(4): 482–487

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, R. and Blair, P. (1981), ‘Spatial aggregation in interregional input–output models’, Papers of the Regional Science Association 48, 149–164

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller R., P. Blair (1985), Input–Output Analysis: Foundations and Extensions. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller R.E., Shao Gang. (1990), Spatial and sectoral aggregation in the commodity-industry multiregion input–output model. Environment and Planning A, 22(12):1637–1656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moromoto Y. (1970), On aggregation problems in input–output analysis, Review of Economic Studies 37(1): 119–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moromoto Y. (1971), A note on weighted aggregation in input–output analysis. International Economic Review 12(1):138–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray A.T. (1998), Minimizing aggregation error in input–output models, Environment and Planning A 30(6):1125–1128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mythili G.. (1995), A note on aggregation error in input–output analysis, Journal of Quantitative Economics 11(2). 149–156

    Google Scholar 

  • OhUallachain B. (1985), Complementary linkages and the hierarchical structure of regions. Geographical Analysis, 17(2): 130–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oksanen B., Williams J.R. (1992), An alternative factor-analytic approach to aggregation of input–output tables. Economic Systems Research 4:245–256

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsen Asger J. (1993), Aggregation in input–output models: prices and quantities, Economic Systems Research 5(3): 253–275

    Google Scholar 

  • Paelinck J.H.P. (2000), On aggregation in spatial econometric modeling. Journal of Geographical Systems 2(2):157–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ralston S.N., Hastings, S.E., Brucker, S.M. (1986), Improving regional I–O models: evidence against uniform regional purchase coefficients Annals of Regional Science 20(1): 65–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Round J.I. (1983), Non-survey techniques: a critical review of the theory and evidence. International Regional Science Review 8(3): 189–212

    Google Scholar 

  • Skolka J. (1964), The Aggregation Problem in Input–Output Analysis. Academy of Sciences, Prague Czechoslovakian

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith P., Morrison W.I. (1974), Simulating the Urban Economy. Pion, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, B.H. and Trainer, G.A. (1976), The generation of error in regional input–output impact models, Working Paper A1–76, Peace Dale, R.I., Regional Science Research Institute

  • Stone, R., Bates, J. and Bacharach, M. (1963), Input–Output Relationships 1954–1966, Volume three of A Program for Growth Series, Cambridge, MA, The MIT Press

  • Stone, R. and Brown, A. (1962), A Computable Model of Economic Growth, Volume one of A Program for Growth Series, London, Chapman and Hall

  • Stover M.E.. (1994), A comparison of annual and benchmark input–output tables in regional economic modeling. Annals of Regional Science 28(2):223–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilanus, C. and Theil, H. (1965), ‘The information approach to the evaluation of input–output forecasts’, Econometrica 32, 4

  • Teibout C.M. (1969), An empirical regional input–output projection model. Review of Economics and Statistics 51:334–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Theil H.. (1957), Linear aggregation in input–output analysis. Econometrica 25:111–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Theil H. (1967). Economics and Information Theory. Rand McNally, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Theil, H. and Uribe, P. (1992), Henri Theil’s Contribution to Economics and Econometrics, Volume 2, Consumer Demand Analysis and Information Theory Advance Studies in Theoretical and Applied Econometrics, 24, Norwell, MA, Kluwer Academic, 955–980

  • Treml V.G., Gallik D.M., Kostinsky B.L., Kruger K.W. (1972), The Structure of the Soviet Economy: Analysis and Reconstruction of the 1966 Input–Output Table. Praeger Publishers Inc., New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Treml, V.G., Gallik, D.M., Kostinsky, B.L., Kurtzweg, L.R. and Tretyakova, A.F. (1976), ‘The Soviet 1966 and 1972 Input–Output Tables’, Soviet Economy in a New Perspective, Joint Economic Committee, Washington, DC, U.S. Congress

  • Williamson R.B. (1970), Simple input–output models for area analysis. Land Economics 46(3): 333–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamada I. (1961), Theory and Application of Interindustry Trade. Kinokuniya Book Co., Tokyo

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Stetson School of Business and Economics, Mercer University, 3001 Mercer University Drive, Atlanta, GA, 30341-4155, USA

    Ali Reza Jalili

Authors
  1. Ali Reza Jalili
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ali Reza Jalili.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jalili, A.R. Impacts of Aggregation on Relative Performances of Nonsurvey Updating Techniques And Intertemporal Stability of Input–Output Coefficients. Econ Change 38, 147–165 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10644-006-9000-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10644-006-9000-2

Key words

Search

Navigation