Jensen and Hewings have devoted most of their comments to our work as presented in a number of papers dated between 1977 and 1982. It might be noted that the tone and content of their current paper is quite different from that adopted in an earlier paper by Jensen. In the present paper we attempt to respond to their major criticisms and reservations one by one and to clarify a number of points where there appears to be some confusion about our purposes and our approach.As a preliminary remark, we should like to point out that Jensen and Hewings (1985) have based most of their comments on our papers that were written between ). The tone and and content of their recent note is quite different to that in an earlier paper (Jensen, 1978). We should also note that in a recent paper (Katz and Burford, 1985) we extend the previous work on output multipliers to include income and employment multipliers as well, and provide a worked out example based on an actual application.Jensen and Hewings have done a thorough job of reviewing the literature on shortcut 'input -output' multipliers. Since a major part of their paper concerns our work and our shortcut multiplier theory, we are responding first with an overview of our work and its implications and then through a point-by-point sequence of responses to the more important issues they have raised.First of all, we do not claim that the shortcut multiplier formulas that we have developed substitute completely for input-output analysis, but only that they closely approximate comparable multiplier values that one would obtain from a complete input-output matrix. To understand why this occurs consider the shortcut output multiplier formula as an example. In a previous paper (Burford and Katz, 1981a) we showed the following: