Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of non-survey techniques for constructing regional input–output tables

  • S.I.: BALCOR-2017
  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

On the grounds of the long discussion in the literature for the construction of regional input–output (I/O) tables, the present study endeavors to identify the best performing method among the most applied location quotient based non-survey techniques. The analysis uses actual data—in particular, the EU input–output tables for the years 2010 and 2014—and by employing three different statistics, it compares the tables created by the quotients FLQ, AFLQ, SLQ, CILQ and RLQ. Comparison is made in both the technical coefficient tables and the Leontief ones. The results indicate that the AFLQ and FLQ provide better results for values of δ from 0.1 to 0.3, whereas for values of δ from 0.4 to 0.9, the results of the two quotients are not satisfactory. At the same time, using another statistic, the SLQ–CILQ technique seemed to yield satisfactory results. Similar results are also presented for the Leontief tables. Finally, using a linear regression model, the imports do not appear to be related to the value of δ in the FLQ.

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

  • Bonfiglio, A. (2005). Can non-survey methods substitute for survey-based models? A performance analysis of indirect techniques of estimating I-O coefficients and multipliers. Quaderno di ricerca number 230. Ancona: Dipartimento di Economia, Universitá Politecnica delle Marche.

  • Bonfiglio, A. (2009). On the parameterization of techniques for representing regional economic structures. Economic Systems Research, 21, 115–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonfiglio, A., & Chelli, F. (2008). Assessing the behaviour of non-survey methods for constructing regional input–output tables through a Monte Carlo simulation. Economic Systems Research, 20(3), 243–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boster, R. S., & Martin, W. E. (1972). The values of primary versus secondary data in interindustry analysis: A study in the economics of the economic models. The Annals of Regional Science, 2(6), 35–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butterfield, M., & Mules, T. (1980). A testing routine for evaluating cell by cell accuracy in short-cut regional input–output tables. Journal of Regional Science, 20(3), 293–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flegg, A. T., Mastronardi, L. J., & Romero, C. A. (2016). Evaluating the FLQ and AFLQ formulae for estimating regional input coefficients: Empirical evidence for the province of Córdoba, Argentina. Economic Systems Research, 28, 21–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flegg, A., & Tohmo, T. (2011). Regional input–output tables and the FLQ formula: A case study of Finland. Regional Studies, 47, 703–721.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flegg, A. T., & Tohmo, T. (2013). Regional input–output tables and the FLQ formula: A case study of Finland. Regional Studies, 47(5), 703–721.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flegg, A.T., & Tohmo, T. (2016). Refining the application of the FLQ formula for estimating regional input coefficients: An empirical study for South Korean regions. University of the West of England, Bristol (UK) School of Business and Economics, Economics working paper 1605.

  • Flegg, A., & Webber, C. D. (1997). On the appropriate use of location quotients in generating regional input–output tables. Regional Studies, 29, 547–561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flegg, A. T., & Webber, C. D. (2000). Regional size, regional specialization and the FLQ formula. Regional Studies, 34, 563–569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giannakis, E., & Efstratoglou, S. (2011). An input–output approach in assessing the CAP reform impact of extensive versus intensive farming systems on rural development: The case of Greece AUA working paper series no. [2010-1].

  • Harrigan, F. J., McGilvray, J. W., & McNicoll, I. H. (1980). Simulating the structure of a regional economy. Environment & Planning A, 12(927–936), 293–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, R. I. D., & Liu, A. (1998). Input–output modelling of the urban and regional economy: The importance of external trade. Regional Studies, 32(9), 851–862.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, R., & Murray, A. (2004). Alternative input-output matrix updating formulations. Economic Systems Research, 16, 135–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jahn, M., Flegg, A., & Tohmo T. (2018). A new approach to estimating interregional output multipliers using input–output data for South Korean regions. Economics working paper series 1805, University of The West England. https://www1.uwe.ac.uk/bl/research/bcef/publications.aspxoutput%20data%20for%20South%20Korean%20regions.pdf.

  • Jalili, A. R. (2000). Comparison of two methods of identifying input–output coefficients for exogenous estimation. Economic Systems Research, 12, 113–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johns, P. M., & Leat, P. M. K. (1987). The application of modified GRIT input–output procedures to rural development analysis in grampian region. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 32(2), 243–256. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-9552.1987.tb01044.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kowalewski, J. (2015). Regionalization of national input–output tables: Empirical evidence on the use of the FLQ formula. Regional Studies, 49, 240–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lahr, M. (1993). A review of literature supporting the hybrid approach to constructing regional input–output models. Economic Systems Research, 5(3), 277–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamonica, G. R., & Chelli, F. M. (2017). The performance of non-survey techniques for constructing sub-territorial input–output tables. Papers in Regional Science. https://doi.org/10.1111/pirs.12297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lampiris, G., Karelakis, C., & Loizou, E. (2018). Evaluation of the impacts of CAP policy measures on a local economy: The case of a Greek region. Land Use Policy, 77, 745–751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.06.019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehtonen, O., & Tykkyläinen, M. (2014). Estimating regional input coefficients and multipliers: Is the choice of a non-survey technique a gamble. Regional Studies, 48, 382–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loizou, E., Chatzitheodoridis, F., Polymeros, K., Michailidis, A., & Mattas, K. (2014). Sustainable development of rural coastal areas: Impacts of a new fisheries policy. Land Use Policy, 38, 41–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loizou, Ε., Jurga, Ρ., Rozakis, S., & Faber, Α. (2019). Αssessing the potentials of bioeconomy sectors in Poland employing input–output modeling. Sustainability, 11, 594. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11030594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattas, Κ., Loizou, Ε., Tzouvelekas, V., & Rozakis, S. (2005). Policy decisions evaluation in agriculture employing input–output analysis: The case of tobacco sector regime reform. In Proceedings of the 89th EAAE Seminar, 3–5 February, 2005 entitled “Modelling agricultural policies: State of the art and new challenges”, Italy: Monte Universita Parma.

  • Mattas, K., Loizou, S., Tzouvelekas, V., Tsakiri, M., & Bonfiglio, A. (2006). Deriving regional I–O tables and multipliers. In A. Bonfiglio, R. Esposti, & F. Sotte (Eds.), Rural balkans and EU integration: An input–output approach. ‎Milan: Franco Angeli.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mccann, P., & Dewhurst, J. H. L. L. (1998). Regional size, industrial location and input–output expenditure coefficients. Regional Studies, 32, 435–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, R., & Blair, P. (1985). Input–output analysis: Foundations and extensions. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, W. I., & Smith, P. (1974). Non–survey input–output techniques at the small area level: An evaluation. Journal of Regional Science, 14(1), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrissey, K. (2016). A location quotient approach to producing regional production multipliers for the Irish economy. Papers in Regional Science, 95, 491–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrissey, K., & O’Donoghue, C. (2013). The role of the marine sector in the Irish national economy: An input–output analysis. Marine Policy, 37, 230–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Psaltopoulos, D., & Balamou, E. (2005). Modelling the effects of trade policy scenarios on multifunctionality in Greek agriculture: A social accounting matrix approach European network of agricultural and rural policy. Research Institutes Enapri working paper N 14.

  • Richardson, H. W. (1972). Input–output and regional economics. New York: Halsted Press, Willey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Round, J. I. (1978). An interregional input-output approach to the evaluation of non-survey methods. Journal of Regional Science, 18, 179–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoeckl, N. (2012). Comparing multipliers from survey and non-survey based io models: An empirical investigation from Northern Australia. International Regional Science Review, 35(4), 367–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tohmo, T. (2004). New developments in the use of location quotients to estimate regional input–output coefficients and multipliers. Regional Studies, 38(1), 43–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, X., & Choi, S.-G. (2015). On the regionalization of input–output tables with an industry-specific location quotient. Annals of Regional Science, 54, 901–926.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Agricultural Policy and Cooperatives, Department of Agricultural Development, School of Agricultural and Forestry Sciences, Democritus University of Thrace, Xanthi, Greece

    Georgios Lampiris & Christos Karelakis

  2. Division of Agricultural Economics, Department of Agricultural Technology, Technological Education Institute (ΤΕΙ) of Western Macedonia, Koila, Greece

    Efstratios Loizou

Authors
  1. Georgios Lampiris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christos Karelakis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Efstratios Loizou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christos Karelakis.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lampiris, G., Karelakis, C. & Loizou, E. Comparison of non-survey techniques for constructing regional input–output tables. Ann Oper Res 294, 225–266 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-019-03337-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-019-03337-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation