2011
DOI: 10.1080/09535314.2010.534978
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Projection of Supply and Use Tables: Methods and Their Empirical Assessment

Abstract: We present eight existing projection methods and test their relative performance in estimating Supply and Use tables (SUTs) of the Netherlands and Spain. Some of the methods presented have received little attention in the literature, and some have been slightly revised to better deal with negative elements and preserve the signs of original matrix entries. We find that (G)RAS and the methods proposed by Harthoorn and van Dalen (1987) and Kuroda (1988) produce the best estimates for the data in question. Their … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
20
0
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 53 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
0
20
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…20 The change in sign is a potential problem when using methods with quadratic or higher order objective functions. One way to deal with this issue is to nullify sign-changing elements in the optimization process by introducing an appropriately defined penalty function in the considered objective function (see, e.g., Temurshoev, Webb, & Yamano, 2011). Otherwise, one can simply use the nonnegativity constraints.…”
Section: Empirical Simulationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…20 The change in sign is a potential problem when using methods with quadratic or higher order objective functions. One way to deal with this issue is to nullify sign-changing elements in the optimization process by introducing an appropriately defined penalty function in the considered objective function (see, e.g., Temurshoev, Webb, & Yamano, 2011). Otherwise, one can simply use the nonnegativity constraints.…”
Section: Empirical Simulationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The implementation of a root-mother-daughter approach for large-scale MRIO construction is associated with a range of challenges. Generally speaking, constructing an MRIO table involves (a) building an initial estimate and a set of constraints; and then (b) combining these in a mathematical optimisation operation to yield a final MRIO table that satisfies the conditions posed by the constraints in an optimal way (Temurshoev et al 2011). The strategy in Wittwer and Horridge's TERM approach is to generate CGE simulation tablespost-optimisation -from a fixed mother (master) table.…”
Section: The Root-mother-daughter Approach To Compiling Large-scale Mmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Building a fully populated MRIO mother at this detail would clearly be impossible since processing the required square 2.8million2.8million-sized matrix would exceed current computational capacities. However, the flexibility of deriving a large variety of daughter tables can be achieved before actually building a mother table, by building flexibility into the mother's construction algorithms.Generally speaking, constructing an MRIO table ("MRIO" in short) involves building an initial estimate (IE) and a set of constraints, which are then combined in a mathematical optimisation operation to yield a final MRIO table that satisfies the conditions posed by the constraints in an optimal way(Temurshoev et al 2011). In essence, the TERM strategy is to generate CGE simulation tables from a mother table post-optimisation.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, partial‐survey methods that incorporate nonmodel information in a nonsurvey model have been advocated (Lahr, ) and widely applied in many global and regional‐level MRIO databases, such as WIOD, IDE‐JETRO MRIO, and China MRIO. The conventional steps of MRIO table construction with partial‐survey methods can be summarized as follows: first, an initial estimate matrix and constraints are built using nonsurvey methods, after which mathematical optimization operations (e.g., the RAS method) or disaggregation of multipliers are used to yield a final MRIO table or multipliers that meet the study requirements (Oosterhaven, ; Temurshoev, Webb, & Yamano, ). These steps work for regional or national MRIO compilations with reasonable workloads.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%