Book contents
- Input–Output Analysis
- Input–Output Analysis
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Preface
- 1 Introduction and Overview
- 2 Foundations of Input–Output Analysis
- 3 Input–Output Models at the Regional Level
- 4 Organization of Basic Data for Input–Output Models
- 5 The Commodity-by-Industry Approach in Input–Output Models
- 6 Multipliers in the Input–Output Model
- 7 Supply-Side Models, Linkages, and Important Coefficients
- 8 Decomposition Approaches
- 9 Nonsurvey and Partial-Survey Methods:
- 10 Nonsurvey and Partial-Survey Methods:
- 11 Social Accounting Matrices
- 12 Energy Input–Output Analysis
- 13 Environmental Input–Output Analysis
- 14 Mixed and Dynamic Models
- 15 Additional Topics
- Postscript
- Book part
- Author Index
- Subject Index
- References
6 - Multipliers in the Input–Output Model
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 January 2022
Book contents
- Input–Output Analysis
- Input–Output Analysis
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Preface
- 1 Introduction and Overview
- 2 Foundations of Input–Output Analysis
- 3 Input–Output Models at the Regional Level
- 4 Organization of Basic Data for Input–Output Models
- 5 The Commodity-by-Industry Approach in Input–Output Models
- 6 Multipliers in the Input–Output Model
- 7 Supply-Side Models, Linkages, and Important Coefficients
- 8 Decomposition Approaches
- 9 Nonsurvey and Partial-Survey Methods:
- 10 Nonsurvey and Partial-Survey Methods:
- 11 Social Accounting Matrices
- 12 Energy Input–Output Analysis
- 13 Environmental Input–Output Analysis
- 14 Mixed and Dynamic Models
- 15 Additional Topics
- Postscript
- Book part
- Author Index
- Subject Index
- References
Summary
Chapter 6 examines a number of key summary analytical measures known as multipliers that can be derived from input–output models to estimate the effects of exogenous changes on (1) new outputs of economic sectors, (2) income earned by households resulting from new outputs, and (3) employment generated from new outputs, (4) value-added generated by production, or (5) energy and environmental effects. The general structure of multiplier analysis and special considerations associated with regional, IRIO, and MRIO models are developed. Extensions to capture the effects of income generation for various household groups are explored, as well as additional multiplier variants. Chapter appendices expand on mathematical formulations of household and income multipliers.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Input-Output AnalysisFoundations and Extensions, pp. 238 - 288Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022
References
Allen, R. I. G. and Lecomber, J. R. C.. 1975. “Some Tests on a Generalised Version of RAS,” in Allen, R. I. G. and Gossling, W. F. (eds.), Estimating and Projecting Input–Output Coefficients. London: Input–Output Publishing Co., pp. 43–56.Google Scholar
Almon, Clopper, Buckler, Margaret B., Horowitz, Lawrence M. and Reimbold, Thomas C.. 1974. 1985: Interindustry Forecasts of the American Economy. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath (Lexington Books).Google Scholar
Barker, Terry S. 1975. “An Analysis of the Updated 1963 Input–Output Transactions Table,” in Allen, R. I. G. and Gossling, W. F. (eds.), Estimating and Projecting Input–Output Coefficients. London: Input–Output Publishing Co., pp. 57–67.Google Scholar
Batey, Peter W. J. and Madden, Moss. 1999. “Interrelational Employment Multipliers in an Extended Input–Output Modeling Framework,” in Hewings, Geoffrey J. D., Sonis, Michael, Madden, Moss and Kimura, Yoshio (eds.), Understanding and Interpreting Economic Structure. Berlin: Springer, pp. 73–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batey, Peter W. J. and Weeks, Melvyn J.. 1989. “The Effects of Household Disaggregation in Extended Input–Output Models,” in Miller, Ronald E., Polenske, Karen R. and Rose, Adam Z. (eds.), Frontiers of Input–Output Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 119–133.Google Scholar
Bradley, Iver E. and Gander, James P.. 1969. “Input–Output Multipliers: Some Theoretical Comments,” Journal of Regional Science, 9, 309–317.Google Scholar
Ciobanu, Claudia, Mattas, Konstadinos and Psaltopoulos, Dimistris. 2004. “Structural Change in Less Developed Areas: An Input–Output Framework,” Regional Studies, 38, 603–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conway, Richard S. Jr. 1977. “The Stability of Regional Input–Output Multipliers,” Environment and Planning A, 9, 197–214.Google Scholar
Dietzenbacher, Erik. 2005. “More on Multipliers,” Journal of Regional Science, 45, 421–426.Google Scholar
DiPasquale, Denise and Polenske, Karen R.. 1980. “Output, Income, and Employment Input–Output Multipliers,” in Pleeter, Saul (ed.), Impact Analysis: Methodology and Applications. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, pp. 85–113.Google Scholar
Emonts-Holley, Tobias, Ross, Andrew G. and Swales, J. Kim. 2014. “A Social Accounting Matrix for Scotland,” Fraser of Allander Institute Economic Commentary, 38, 84–93.Google Scholar
Emonts-Holley, Tobias, Ross, Andrew G. and Swales, J. Kim. 2021. “Estimating Induced Effects in IO Impact Analysis: Variation in the Methods for Calculating the Type II Leontief Multipliers,” Economic Systems Research. In press. DOI: 10.1080/09535314.2020.1837741 (published online 29 October 2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, W. Duane and Hoffenberg, Marvin. 1952. The Interindustry Relations Study for 1947,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 34, 97–142.Google Scholar
Georgescu-Roegen, N. 1971. The Entropy Law and the Economic Process. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gowdy, John M. 1991. “Structural Change in the USA and Japan: An Extended Input–Output Analysis,” Economic Systems Research, 3, 413–423.Google Scholar
Gray, S. Lee, McKean, John R., Sparling, Edward W. and Weber, Joseph C.. 1979. “Measurement of Growth Equalized Employment Multiplier Effects: An Empirical Example,” Annals of Regional Science, 13, 68–75.Google Scholar
Hewings, Geoffrey J. D., Okuyama, Yasuhide and Sonis, Michael. 2001. “Economic Interdependence within the Chicago Metropolitan Area: A Miyazawa Analysis,” Journal of Regional Science, 41, 195–217.Google Scholar
Hewings, Geoffrey J. D. and Parr, John B.. 2007. “Spatial Interdependence in a Metropolitan Setting,” Spatial Economic Analysis, 2, 7–22.Google Scholar
Hewings, Geoffrey J. D., Sonis, Michael, Madden, Moss and Kimura, Yoshio (eds.). 1999. Understanding and Interpreting Economic Structure. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Hioki, Shiro. 2005. “The Magnitude of Interregional Input–Output Spillover Effects in China and its Implications for China’s Uneven Regional Growth,” in Okamoto, Nobuhiro and Ihara, Takeo (eds.), Spatial Structure and Regional Development in China: An Interregional Input–Output Approach. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan (for IDE/JETRO), pp. 154–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirsch, Werner Z. 1959. “Interindustry Relations of a Metropolitan Area,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 41, 360–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, Rodney C. 1978. “Some Accounting Procedures and their Effects on Input–Output Multipliers,” International Regional Science Review, 12, 21–38.Google Scholar
Katz, Joseph L. 1980. “The Relationship Between Type I and Type II Income Multipliers in an Input–Output Model,” International Regional Science Review, 5, 51–56.Google Scholar
Lenzen, Manfred. 2003. “Environmentally Important Paths, Linkages and Key Sectors in the Australian Economy,” Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 14, 1–34.Google Scholar
Lenzen, Manfred and Rueda-Cantuche, José M.. 2012. “A Note on the Use of Supply–Use Tables in Impact Analyses,” SORT, 36, 139–152.Google Scholar
Leontief, Wassily. 1951. The Structure of American Economy 1919–1939 (Second Edition, Enlarged). White Plains, NY: International Arts and Science Press (Reprint, 1976).Google Scholar
Leontief, Wassily, Chenery, Hollis B., Clark, Paul G., Duesenberry, James S., Ferguson, Allen R., Grosse, Anne P., Grosse, Robert H., Holzman, Mathilda, Isard, Walter and Kistin, Helen. 1953. Studies in the Structure of the American Economy. White Plains, NY: International Arts and Science Press (Reprint, 1976).Google Scholar
Madden, Moss and Batey, Peter W. J.. 1983. “Linked Population and Economic Models: Some Methodological Issues in Forecasting, Analysis, and Policy Optimization,” Journal of Regional Science, 23, 141–164.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mattas, Konstadinos A. and Shrestha, Chandra M.. 1991. “A New Approach to Determining Sectoral Priorities in an Economy: Input–Output Elasticities,” Applied Economics, 23, 247–254.Google Scholar
de Mesnard, Louis. 2002. “Note about the Concept of ‘Net Multipliers’,” Journal of Regional Science, 42, 545–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Mesnard, Louis. 2007a. “A Critical Comment on Oosterhaven-Stelder Net Multipliers,” Annals of Regional Science, 41, 249–271.Google Scholar
de Mesnard, Louis. 2007b. “Reply to Oosterhaven’s: The Net Multiplier is a New Key Sector Indicator,” Annals of Regional Science, 41, 285–296.Google Scholar
Miernyk, William H., Bonner, Ernest R., Chapman, John H. Jr. and Shellhammer, Kenneth. 1967. Impact of the Space Program on a Local Economy: An Input–Output Analysis. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University Library.Google Scholar
Miyazawa, Ken’ichi. 1976. Input–Output Analysis and the Structure of Income Distribution. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
Moore, Frederick T. 1955. “Regional Economic Reaction Paths,” American Economic Review, 45, 133–148.Google Scholar
Moore, Frederick T. and Petersen, James W. 1955. “Regional Analysis: An Interindustry Model of Utah,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 37, 368–381.Google Scholar
Oosterhaven, Jan. 2007. “The Net Multiplier is a New Key Sector Indicator: Reply to de Mesnard’s Comment,” Annals of Regional Science, 41, 273–283.Google Scholar
Oosterhaven, Jan, Piek, Gerrit and Stelder, Dirk. 1986. “Theory and Practice of Updating Regional versus Interregional Interindustry Tables,” Papers of the Regional Science Association, 59, 57–72.Google Scholar
Oosterhaven, Jan and Stelder, Dirk. 2002a. “Net Multipliers Avoid Exaggerating Impacts: With a Bi-Regional Illustration for the Dutch Transportation Sector,” Journal of Regional Science, 42, 533–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oosterhaven, Jan and Stelder, Dirk. 2002b. “On the Economic Impact of the Transport sector: A Critical Review with Dutch Bi-Regional Input–Output Data,” in Hewings, Geoffrey J. D., Sonis, Michael and Boyce, David (eds.), Trade, Networks and Hierarchies. Modeling Regional and Interregional Economies. Berlin: Springer, pp. 119–133.Google Scholar
ten Raa, Thijs and Chakraborty, Debesh. 1983. “A Note on Induced Multiplier,” Artha Vijnana, 25, 277–279.Google Scholar
Rose, Adam Z. and Li, Ping-Chen. 1999. “Interrelational Multipliers for the US Economy: An Application to Welfare Reform,” in Hewings, Geoffrey J. D., Sonis, Michael, Madden, Moss and Kimura, Yoshio (eds.), Understanding and Interpreting Economic Structure. Berlin: Springer, pp. 347–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rueda-Cantuche, José M. 2011. “Econometric Analysis of European Carbon Dioxide Emissions Based on Rectangular Supply–Use Tables,” Economic Systems Research, 23, 261–280.Google Scholar
Sandoval, A. David. 1967. “Constant Relationship between Input–Output Income Multipliers,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 49, 599–600.Google Scholar
Sonis, Michael and Hewings, Geoffrey J. D.. 1993. “Hierarchies of Regional Sub-Structures and their Multipliers within Input–Output Systems: Miyazawa Revisited,” Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, 34, 33–44.Google Scholar
Sonis, Michael 1995. “Matrix Sensitivity, Error Analysis and Internal/External Multiregional Multipliers,” Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, 36, 61–70.Google Scholar
Sonis, Michael 1999. “Miyazawa’s Contributions to Understanding Economic Structure: Interpretation, Evaluation and Extensions,” in Hewings, Geoffrey J. D., Sonis, Michael, Madden, Moss and Kimura, Yoshio (eds.), Understanding and Interpreting Economic Structure. Berlin: Springer, pp. 13–51.Google Scholar
Sonis, Michael 2000. “LDU-factorization of Miyazawa Income Multipliers in Multiregional Systems,” Annals of Regional Science, 34, 569–589.Google Scholar
Steenge, Albert E. 1990. “The Commodity Technology Revisited: Theoretical Basis and an Application to Error Location in the Make–Use Framework,” Economic Modelling, 7, 376–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szyrmer, Janusz. 1992. “Input–Output Coefficients and Multipliers from a Total-Flow Perspective,” Environment and Planning A, 24, 921–937.Google Scholar
United Kingdom, Central Statistical Office. 1961. Input–Output Tables for the United Kingdom 1954. Studies in Official Statistics, No. 8. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
United Kingdom, Central Statistical Office. 1970. Input–Output Tables for the United Kingdom 1963. Studies in Official Statistics, No. 16. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Weber, Christoph. 1998. “Zerlegung kumulierter Energieaufwendungen als Instrument der umweltorientierten Verflechtungsanalyse,” (Decomposition of Total Energy Requirements as a Tool for an Environmentally Oriented Analysis of Economic Interdependencies), Jahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik, 217(3), 273–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar