Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T12:16:16.883Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Application of the Bishop-Simpson Method: A Shift-Share Variant

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2017

Bruce E. Lindsay  and
Susan E. Martin
Bruce E. Lindsay
Affiliation:
Institute of Natural and Environmental Resources, University of New Hampshire
Susan E. Martin
Affiliation:
Institute of Natural and Environmental Resources, University of New Hampshire
Get access

Abstract

The Bishop-Simpson model, a variant of the traditional shift-share approach, is utilized for investigation of the development of the southern New Hampshire regional economy over time. Emphasis is placed on the strengths of the new technique in counteracting some of the limitations of traditional shift-share analyses. The B and S technique gives a clearer picture than the traditional shift-share approach of the relative advantages and disadvantages for region in terms of its specialization in slow or fast growing industries.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the Northeastern Agricultural Economics Council , Volume 7 , Issue 1 , April 1978 , pp. 47 - 49
Copyright
Copyright © Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Published with the approval of the Director of the New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station as Scientific Contribution No. 892.

References

Ashby, Lowell D. Growth Patterns in Employment by County, 1940–50 and 1950–60. U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of Business Economics, Washington, 1965.Google Scholar
Ashby, Lowell D. “The Shift and Share Analysis: A Reply.” Southern Economic Journal, 34(1968): 423–425.Google Scholar
Bishop, K. C. and Simpson, C. E. “Components of Change Analysis: Problems of Alternative Approaches to Industrial Structure.” Regional Studies, 6(1972): 59–68.Google Scholar
Brown, H. J. “Shift and Share Projections of Regional Economic Growth: An Empirical Test.” Journal of Regional Science, No. 1 (1969), pp. 1–18.Google Scholar
Brown, H. J., “The Stability of the Regional-Share Component: Reply.” Journal of Regional Science, No. 1 (1971), pp. 113–114.Google Scholar
Hale, Carl W. “Shift-Share Analysis as a Descriptive Tool in Regional Analysis.” Mississippi Valley Journal of Business Economics, 6(1971): 65–74.Google Scholar
Houston, David B. “The Shift and Share Analysis of Regional Growth: A Critique.” Southern Economic Journal, 33(1967): 577–81.Google Scholar
Martin, Susan E. “Employment Changes in Southern New Hampshire: A Shift-Share Approach.” M. S. thesis, University of New Hampshire, 1977.Google Scholar
Perloff, H. S., Dunn, E. S., Lampard, E. E. and Muth, R. F. Regions, Resources and Economic Growth. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1960.Google Scholar
Randall, J. N. “Shift-Share Analysis as a Guide to the Employment Performance of West Central Scotland.” Scottish Journal of Political Economy, No. 1 (1973), pp. 1–26.Google Scholar
Stilwell, F. J. B. “Regional Growth and Structural Adaptation.” Urban Studies, 6(1969): 162–78.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis. Regional Employment by Industry, 1940–1970. Washington, 1975.Google Scholar