2013
DOI: 10.1080/09535314.2013.774265
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Testing Assumptions Made in the Construction of Input–output Tables

Abstract: Product input-output (IO) tables are mainly constructed on the basis of product and/or industry technology assumptions. The choice is not trivial and deserves empirical analysis using input and output data at the level of establishments. This paper offers input-output compilers econometric tests to facilitate the construction of tailored hybrid technology-based product IO tables. We provide weighted likelihood ratios of the product and industry technology assumptions. Although the proposed econometric tests ar… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Another important element is the principal decision to construct the database as a supply‐use table (SUT) (as is the case with EXIOBASE), which can be converted via various techniques into a GMRIO (with again implications for calculated footprints), or directly available as a GMRIO (e.g., GTAP, WIOD, or ICIO). It can be expected that country‐level footprints vary as a function of the model that is used to construct the IOT from the SUT (e.g., the industry or product technology assumption, and others; see Eurostat []; Rueda Cantuche and ten Raa [, ]).…”
Section: Factors Affecting Robustness Of Footprints Calculated With Gmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another important element is the principal decision to construct the database as a supply‐use table (SUT) (as is the case with EXIOBASE), which can be converted via various techniques into a GMRIO (with again implications for calculated footprints), or directly available as a GMRIO (e.g., GTAP, WIOD, or ICIO). It can be expected that country‐level footprints vary as a function of the model that is used to construct the IOT from the SUT (e.g., the industry or product technology assumption, and others; see Eurostat []; Rueda Cantuche and ten Raa [, ]).…”
Section: Factors Affecting Robustness Of Footprints Calculated With Gmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…--ten Raa and van der Ploeg (1989): using SUTs data variances and a maximum likelihood approach, obtain new, updated SUTs that are consistent with non-negative IO coefficients under commodity technology model, sensitivity of input coefficients with respect to SUTs entries is examined. See also ten Raa (1988), Mattey and ten Raa (1997), and Rueda-Cantuche and ten Raa (2013).…”
Section: Supply and Use Tables/flows (Suts)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…--ten Raa and van der Ploeg (1989): using SUTs data variances and a maximum likelihood approach, obtain new, updated SUTs that are consistent with non-negative IO coefficients under commodity technology model, sensitivity of input coefficients with respect to SUTs entries is examined. See also ten Raa (1988), Mattey and ten Raa (1997), and Rueda-Cantuche and ten Raa (2013).…”
Section: Supply and Use Tables/flows (Suts)mentioning
confidence: 99%