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
14 - Mixed and Dynamic Models
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 14 describes so called mixed input–output models that are driven by a mix of output and final demand specifications rather than driven either solely by specification by final demand or total output. This chapter also introduces dynamic input–output models that more explicitly capture the role of capital investment and utilization in the production process.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Input-Output AnalysisFoundations and Extensions, pp. 678 - 721Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022
References
Almon, Clopper. 1970. “Investment in Input–Output Models and the Treatment of Secondary Products,” in Carter, Anne P. and Bródy, Andrew (eds.), Applications of Input–Output Analysis, Vol. 2 of Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Input–Output Techniques. Geneva, 1968. Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 103–116.Google Scholar
Bródy, Andrew. 1995. “Truncation and Spectrum of the Dynamic Inverse,” Economic Systems Research, 7, 235–247.Google Scholar
Carter, Anne P. 1974. “Energy, Environment and Economic Growth,” Bell Journal of Economics, 5, 578–594.Google Scholar
Cole, Sam. 1988. “The Delayed Impacts of Plant Closures in a Reformulated Leontief Model,” Papers of the Regional Science Association, 65, 135–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, Sam. 1989. “Expenditure Lags in Impact Analysis,” Regional Studies, 23, 105–116.Google Scholar
Cole, Sam. 1997. “Closure in Cole’s Reformulated Leontief Model: A Response to R. W. Jackson, M. Madden and H. A. Bowman,” Papers in Regional Science, 76, 29–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, Sam. 1999a. “In the Spirit of Miyazawa: Multipliers and the Metropolis,” in Hewings, Geoffrey J. D., Sonis, Michael, Madden, Moss and Kimura, Yoshio (eds.), Understanding and Interpreting Economic Structure. Berlin: Springer, pp. 263–286.Google Scholar
Cole, Sam. 1999b. “The Phantom of the Matrix: Inverting the Case on Closure in Cole’s Model,” Papers in Regional Science, 78, 429–436.Google Scholar
Dorfman, Robert, Samuelson, Paul A. and Solow, Robert M.. 1958. Linear Programming and Economic Analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Duchin, Faye and Szyld, Daniel B.. 1985. “A Dynamic Input–Output Model with Assured Positive Output,” Metroeconomica, 37, 269–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eiser, D. and Roberts, D.. 2002. “The Employment and Output Effects of Changing Patterns of Afforestation in Scotland,” Journal of Agricultural Economics, 53, 65–81.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
Findeis, Jill L. and Whittlesey, Norman K.. 1984. “The Secondary Economic Impacts of Irrigation Development in Washington,” Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, 9, 233–243.Google Scholar
Isard, Walter and Kuenne, Robert E.. 1953. “The Impact of Steel upon the Greater New York–Philadelphia Industrial Region,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 35, 289–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, Randall W., Madden, Moss and Bowman, Harry A.. 1997. “Closure in Cole’s Reformulated Leontief Model,” Papers in Regional Science, 76, 21–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, Randall W. and Madden, Moss. 1999. “Closing the Case on Closure in Cole’s Model,” Papers in Regional Science, 78, 423–427.Google Scholar
Johnson, Thomas G. and Kulshreshtha, Surendra N.. 1982. “Exogenizing Agriculture in an Input–Output Model to Estimate Relative Impacts of Different Farm Types,” Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, 7, 187–198.Google Scholar
Leontief, Wassily. 1970. “The Dynamic Inverse,” in Carter, Anne P. and Bródy, Andrew (eds.), Contributions to Input–Output Analysis, Vol. 1 of Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Input–Output Techniques. Geneva, 1968. Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 17–43.Google Scholar
Leontief, Wassily and Duchin, Faye. 1986. The Future Impact of Automation on Workers. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Leung, PingSun and Pooley, Sam. 2002. “Regional Economic Impacts of Reductions in Fisheries Production: A Supply-Driven Approach,” Marine Resource Economics, 16, 251–262.Google Scholar
Levine, Stephen H. and Romanoff, Eliahu. 1989. “Economic Impact Dynamics of Complex Engineering Project Scheduling,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 19, 232–240.Google Scholar
Liew, Chong K. 1977. “Dynamic Multipliers for a Regional Input–Output Model,” Annals of Regional Science, 11, 94–106.Google Scholar
Liew, Chung J. 2000. “The Dynamic Variable Input–Output Model: An Advancement from the Leontief Dynamic Input–Output Model,” Annals of Regional Science, 34, 591–614.Google Scholar
Liew, Chung J. 2005. “Dynamic Variable Input–Output (VIO) Model and Price-Sensitive Dynamic Multipliers,” Annals of Regional Science, 39, 607–627.Google Scholar
Miernyk, William H. and Sears, John T.. 1974. Air Pollution Abatement and Regional Economic Development. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath and Co.Google Scholar
Miernyk, William H., Shellhammer, Kenneth L., Brown, Douglas M., Coccari, Ronald L., Gallagher, Charles J. and Wineman, Wesley H.. 1970. Simulating Regional Economic Development: An Interindustry Analysis of the West Virginia Economy. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath and Co.Google Scholar
Miller, Ronald E. 1957. “The Impact of the Aluminum Industry on the Pacific Northwest: A Regional Input–Output Analysis,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 39, 200–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mules, Trevor J. 1983. “Some Simulations with a Sequential Input–Output Model,” Papers of the Regional Science Association, 51, 197–204.Google Scholar
Papadas, Christos T. and Dahl, Dale C.. 1999. “Supply-Driven Input–Output Multipliers,” Journal of Agricultural Economics, 50, 269–285.Google Scholar
Petkovich, M. D. and Ching, C. T. K.. 1978. “Modifying a One Region Leontief Input–Output Model to Show Sector Capacity Constraints,” Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, 3, 173–179.Google Scholar
ten Raa, Thijs. 1986. “Dynamic Input–Output Analysis with Distributed Activities,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 68, 300–310.Google Scholar
ten Raa, Thijs. 2005. The Economics of Input–Output Analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ritz, Philip M. and Spaulding, Elizabeth. 1975. “Basic I-O Terminology,” unpublished memorandum, US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Interindustry Economics Division, February 25.Google Scholar
Roberts, D. 1994. “A Modified Leontief Model for Analysing the Impact of Milk Quotas on the Wider Economy,” Journal of Agricultural Economics, 45, 90–101.Google Scholar
Romanoff, Eliahu. 1984, “Interindustry Analysis for Regional Growth and Development: The Dynamics of Manpower Issues,” Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 18, 353–363.Google Scholar
Romanoff, Eliahu and Levine, Stephen H.. 1977. “Interregional Sequential Interindustry Modeling: A Preliminary Analysis of Regional Growth and Decline in a Two Region Case,” Northeast Regional Science Review, 7, 87–101.Google Scholar
Romanoff, Eliahu and Levine, Stephen H.. 1981. “Anticipatory and Responsive Sequential Interindustry Models,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 11, 181–186.Google Scholar
Romanoff, Eliahu and Levine, Stephen H.. 1986. “Capacity Limitations, Inventory, and Time-Phased Production in the Sequential Interindustry Model,” Papers of the Regional Science Association, 59, 73–91.Google Scholar
Romanoff, Eliahu and Levine, Stephen H.. 1990a. “Combined Regional Impact Dynamics of Several Construction Megaprojects,” Regional Science Review, 17, 85–93.Google Scholar
Romanoff, Eliahu and Levine, Stephen H.. 1990b. “Technical Change in Production Processes of the Sequential Interindustry Model,” Metroeconomica, 41, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romanoff, Eliahu and Levine, Stephen H.. 1991. “Technical Change and Regional Development: Some Further Developments with the Sequential Interindustry Model,” in Boyce, David E., Nijkamp, Peter and Shafer, Dani (eds.), Regional Science: Retrospect and Prospect. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 251–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romanoff, Eliahu and Levine, Stephen H.. 1993. “Information, Interindustry Dynamics and the Service Industries,” Environment and Planning, A, 25, 305–316.Google Scholar
Steenge, Albert E. and Reyes, Rachel C.. 2020. “Return of the Capital Coefficients Matrix,” Economic Systems Research, 32, 439–450.Google Scholar
Steenge, Albert E. and Thissen, Mark J. P. M.. 2005. “A New Matrix Theorem: Interpretation in Terms of Internal Trade Structure and Implications for Dynamic Systems,” Journal of Economics, 84, 71–94.Google Scholar
Steinback, Scott. 2004. “Using Ready-Made Regional Input–Output Models to Estimate Backward Linkage Effects of Exogenous Output Shocks,” Review of Regional Studies, 34, 57–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanjuakio, Rodolfo, Hastings, Steven E. and Tytus, Peter J.. 1996. “The Economic Contribution of Agriculture in Delaware,” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, 25, 46–53.Google Scholar
Tiebout, Charles M. 1969. “An Empirical Regional Input–Output Projection Model: The State of Washington 1980,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 51, 334–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 1
- Cited by