There is a growing body of evidence which suggests that, used in conjunction with a suitable estimation method, the incorporation of good quality exogenous data can enhance the accuracy of simulated or updated regional input—output matrices. However, there has been little attempt to measure explicitly the accuracy of simulation results in relation to the data used in their estimation. Within the context of programming estimation procedure, comparable measures of the ‘quantity’ of exogenous data and the accuracy of simulation are developed in this paper. Subsequently, this framework is demonstrated using Scottish and Washington input—output tables.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllenR I G, 1974, “Some experiments with the RAS method of updating input—output coefficients”Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics36215–228
2.
BattenD, 1982, “The interregional linkages between national and regional input—output tables”International Regional Science Review753–68
3.
BeyersWBourqueP JWeeksE, 1970, “Input—output tables for the Washington State Economy, 1967”Graduate School of Business and Administration, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195
4.
BourqueP JWeeksE, 1967, “The Washington State Economy: an input—output study”Graduate School of Business and Administration, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195
5.
ButterfieldMMulesT, “A testing routine for evaluating cell by cell accuracy in short-cut regional input—output tables”Journal of Regional Science20293–311
6.
ByronR P, 1978, “The estimation of large scale social accounting matrices”Journal of the Royal Statistical Society A141359–367
7.
DrakeR L, 1976, “A short-cut to estimates of regional input output multipliers: methodology and evaluation”International Regional Science Review11–17
8.
FAI, 1978Input—Output Tables for Scotland 1973 Fraser of Allander Institute, IBM (UK) Ltd, and the Scottish Council Research and Industry (Scottish Academic Press, Edinburgh)
9.
HarriganF, 1984, “A neglected property of constrained matrix solutions” mimeo, Fraser of Allander Institute, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow
10.
HarriganFBuchananJ T, 1984, “A quadratic programming approach to the estimation and simulation of input—output tables”Journal of Regional Science24339–358
11.
HarriganFMcNicollI, 1981, “Superior information and location quotient methods: some observations on method and practice” DP-9, Fraser of Allander Institute, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow
12.
HarriganFMcGilvrayJ WMcNicollI, 1980a, “Simulating the structure of a regional economy”Environment and Planning A12927–936
13.
HarriganFMcNicollIMcGilvrayJ, 1980b, “A comparison of regional and national technical structures”Economic Journal90795–810
14.
HewingsG J D, 1977, “Evaluating the possibilities for exchanging regional input—output coefficients”Environment and Planning A9927–944
15.
HewingsG J DRomanosM C, 1981, “Simulating less developed economies under conditions of limited information”Geographical Analysis13373–390
JensenR CWestG R, 1980, “The effect of relative coefficient size on input—output multipliers”Environment and Planning A12659–670
18.
JudgeGCarter-HillRLutkepholHChao-LeeT, 1982Introduction to the Theory and Practice of Econometrics (John Wiley, New York)
19.
MorrisonW IThumannR G, 1980, “A Lagrangean multiplier approach to the solution of a special constrained matrix problem”Journal of Regional Science141–14
20.
RoundJ I, 1984, “Non-survey techniques: a critical review of the theory and the evidence”International Regional Science Review8189–212
21.
SmithPMorrisonW I, 1974Simulating the Urban Economy (Pion, London)
22.
ThumannR G, 1978, “A comment on ‘Evaluating the possibilities for exchanging regional input-output coefficients’”Environment and Planning A10321–325
23.
van der Ploeg, 1982, “Reliability and adjustment of sequences of large economic accounting matrices”Journal of the Royal Statistical Society A145169–194
