Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T10:02:46.508Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

5 - The Commodity-by-Industry Approach in Input–Output Models

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 January 2022

Ronald E. Miller  and
Peter D. Blair
Ronald E. Miller
Affiliation:
University of Pennsylvania
Peter D. Blair
Affiliation:
George Mason University
Get access

Summary

Chapter 5 explores variations to the commodity-by-industry input–output framework introduced in Chapter 4, expanding the basic input–output framework to include distinguishing between commodities and industries, i.e., the supply of specific commodities in the economy and the use of those commodities by collections of businesses defined as industries. The chapter introduces the fundamental commodity-by-industry accounting relationships and how they relate to the basic input–output framework. Alternative assumptions are defined for handling the common accounting issue of secondary production, and economic interpretations of those alternative assumptions are presented. The formulations of commodity-driven and industry-driven models are also presented along with illustrations of variants on combining alternative assumptions for secondary production. Finally, the chapter illustrates the problem encountered with commodity-by-industry models, such as non-square commodity–industry systems, mixed technology options, or the interpretation of negative elements.

Keywords

commodity-by-industry accountingsupply matrixmake matrixuse matrixsecondary productioncommodity-driven modelsindustry driven modelsnon-square systemsdirect requirementstotal requirements
Type
Chapter
Information
Input-Output Analysis
Foundations and Extensions
 , pp. 176 - 237
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aidenoff, Abraham. 1970. “Input–Output Data in the United Nations System of National Accounts,” in Carter, Anne P. and Bródy, Andrew (eds.), Applications of Input–Output Analysis, Vol. 2 of Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Input–Output Techniques. Geneva, 1968. Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 349–368.Google Scholar
Almon, Clopper. 1970. “Investment in Input–Output Models and the Treatment of Secondary Products,” in Carter, Anne P. and Bródy, Andrew (eds.), Applications of Input–Output Analysis, Vol. 2 of Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Input–Output Techniques, Geneva, 1968. Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 103–116.Google Scholar
Almon, Clopper 2000. “Product-to-Product Tables via Product Technology with No Negative Flows,” Economic Systems Research, 12, 27–43.Google Scholar
Almon, Clopper, Buckler, Margaret B., Horowitz, Lawrence M. and Reimbold, Thomas C.. 1974. 1985: Interindustry Forecasts of the American Economy. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath (Lexington Books).Google Scholar
Armstrong, A. G. 1975. “Technology Assumptions in the Construction of U.K. Input–Output Tables,” in Allen, R. I. G. and Gossling, W. F. (eds.), Estimating and Projecting Input–Output Coefficients. London: Input–Output Publishing Co., pp. 68–93.Google Scholar
Bulmer-Thomas, Victor. 1982. Input–Output Analysis in Developing Countries. London: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.Google Scholar
Cambridge University, Department of Applied Economics. 1963. Input–Output Relationships, 1954–1966. Vol. 3 of A Programme for Growth. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Cressy, Robert C. 1976. “Commodity and Industry Technology: Symbols and Assumptions,” Manchester School of Economics and Social Studies, 44, 112–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eurostat, . 1996. European System of Accounts, ESA, 1995. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. (November.) Available at www.ec.europa.eu/eurostat under “publications/methodologies and working papers.”Google Scholar
Eurostat/European Commission. 2008. Eurostat Manual of Supply, Use and Input–Output Tables. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. (March.) Available at www.ec.europa.eu/eurostat under “publications/methodologies and working papers.”Google Scholar
Franz, Alfred and Rainer, Norbert (eds.). 1989. Compilation of Input–Output Data. Proceedings of the 2nd International Meeting on Problems of Compilation in Input–Output Tables, organized by the Austrian Statistical Society, Baden near Vienna, Austria, March 13–19, 1988. (Schriftenreihe der Oesterreichischen Statistischen Gesellschaft, B and 4.) Vienna: Orac.Google Scholar
Fukui, Yukio and Seneta, E.. 1985. “A Theoretical Approach to the Conventional Treatment of Joint Product in Input–Output Tables,” Economics Letters, 18, 175–179.Google Scholar
Gigantes, T. 1970. “The Representation of Technology in Input–Output Systems,” in Carter, Anne P. and Bródy, Andrew (eds.), Applications of Input–Output Analysis, Vol. 2 of Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Input–Output Techniques. Geneva, 1968. Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 270–290.Google Scholar
Jack Faucett Associates, Inc. 1981–1983. Multiregional Input–Output Accounts, 1977. Vol. 1, Introduction and Summary (July, 1983); Vol. 2, State Estimates of Outputs, Employment and Payrolls (December, 1981); Vol. 3, Development of Value Added Estimates by MRIO Sector by State (December, 1981); Vol. 4, State Estimates of Final Demands (April, 1982); Vol. 5, State Estimates of Inputs to Industries (May, 1982); Vol. 6, Interregional Commodity Flows (August, 1982). Prepared for Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, US Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC. Reproduced by the National Technical Information Service (NTIS). Washington, DC: US Department of Commerce.Google Scholar
Jackson, Randall W. 1998. “Regionalizing National Commodity-by-Industry Accounts,” Economic Systems Research, 10, 223–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, Randall W. and Schwarm, Walter R.. 2011. “Accounting Foundations for Interregional Commodity-by-Industry Input–Output Models,” Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences, 4, 187–196.Google Scholar
Konijn, P. J. A. and Steenge, Albert E.. 1995. “Compilation of Input–Output Data from the National Accounts,” Economic Systems Research, 7, 31–45.Google Scholar
Kop Jansen, Pieter and ten Raa, Thijs. 1990. “The Choice of Model in the Construction of Input–Output Coefficients Matrices,” International Economic Review, 31, 213–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lancaster, Kelvin. 1968. Mathematical Economics. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Lenzen, Manfred and Rueda-Cantuche, José M.. 2012. “A Note on the Use of Supply–Use Tables in Impact Analyses,” SORT [Statistics and Operations Research Transactions], 36, 139–152.Google Scholar
Londero, Elio. 1990. “On the Treatment of Secondary Products and By-Products in the Preparation of Input–Output Tables,” Economic Systems Research, 2, 321–322.Google Scholar
Londero, Elio. 1999. “Secondary Products, By-Products and the Commodity Technology Assumption,” Economic Systems Research, 11, 195–203.Google Scholar
Londero, Elio. 2001. “By-Products,” Economic Systems Research, 13, 35–45.Google Scholar
Mattey, Joe and ten Raa, Thijs. 1997. “Primary versus Secondary Production Techniques in U.S. Manufacturing,” Review of Income and Wealth, 43, 449–464.Google Scholar
de Mesnard, Louis. 2004. “Understanding the Shortcomings of Commodity-Based Technology in Input–Output Models: An Economic Circuit Approach,” Journal of Regional Science, 44, 125–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ten Raa, Thijs. 1988. “An Alternative Treatment of Secondary Products in Input–Output Analysis: Frustration,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 70, 535–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ten Raa, Thijs. 1995. Linear Analysis of Competitive Economies. Hertfordshire: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
ten Raa, Thijs. 2005. The Economics of Input–Output Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
ten Raa, Thijs, Chakraborty, Debesh and Anthony Small, J.. 1984. “An Alternative Treatment of Secondary Products in Input–Output Analysis,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 66, 88–97.Google Scholar
ten Raa, Thijs and Rueda-Cantuche, José Manuel. 2003. “The Construction of Input–Output Coefficients Matrices in an Axiomatic Context: Some Further Considerations,” Economic Systems Research, 15, 439–455.Google Scholar
ten Raa, Thijs and Rueda-Cantuche, José Manuel. 2007. “A Generalized Expression for the Commodity and the Industry Technology Models in Input–Output Analysis,” Economic Systems Research, 19, 99–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ten Raa, Thijs and van der Ploeg, Rick. 1989. “A Statistical Approach to the Problem of Negatives in Input–Output Analysis,” Economic Modelling, 6, 2–19.Google Scholar
Rainer, Norbert. 1989. “Descriptive versus Analytical Make-Use Systems: Some Austrian Experiences,” in Miller, Ronald E., Polenske, Karen R. and Rose, Adam Z. (eds.), Frontiers of Input–Output Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 51–64.Google Scholar
Rainer, Norbert and Richter, Joseph. 1989. “The SNA Make-Use Framework as a Descriptive Basis for IO Analysis,” in Franz, Alfred and Rainer, Norbert (eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd International Meeting on Problems of Compilation in Input–Output Tables, organized by the Austrian Statistical Society, Baden near Vienna, Austria, March 13–19, 1988. (Schriftenreihe der Oesterreichischen Statistischen Gesellschaft, B and 4.) Vienna: Orac, pp. 233–255.Google Scholar
Rainer, Norbert and Richter, Joseph. 1992. “Some Aspects of the Analytical Use of Descriptive Make and Absorption Tables,” Economic Systems Research, 4, 159–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritz, Philip M. 1980. “Definitions and Conventions of the 1972 Input–Output Study.” US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis Staff Paper 80–034 (July, 1980). Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Rueda-Cantuche, José M. 2017. “The Construction of Input-Output Coefficients,” in ten Raa, Thijs (ed.), Handbook of Input–Output Analysis. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc., chapter 4, pp. 133–174.Google Scholar
Stahmer, Carsten. 1985. “Transformation Matrices in Input–Output Compilation,” in Smyshlyaev, Anatoli (ed.), Input–Output Modeling. Proceedings of the Fifth IISAS (International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis) Task Force Meeting on Input–Output Modeling. Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, No. 251. Laxenburg, Austria, October 4–6, 1984. Berlin: Springer, pp. 225–236.Google Scholar
Statistics Canada, Input–Output Division. 1981. “The Input–Output Structure of the Canadian Economy in Constant 1971 Prices, 1971–77,” Catalogue 15–202E.Google Scholar
Steenge, Albert E. 1989. “Second Thoughts on the Commodity Technology and the Industry Technology Approaches,” in Franz, Alfred and Rainer, Norbert (eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd International Meeting on Problems of Compilation in Input–Output Tables, organized by the Austrian Statistical Society, Baden near Vienna, Austria, March 13–19, 1988. (Schriftenreihe der Oesterreichischen Statistischen Gesellschaft, B and 4.) Vienna: Orac, pp. 411–429.Google Scholar
Steenge, Albert E. 1990. “The Commodity Technology Revisited: Theoretical Basis and an Application to Error Location in the Make-Use Framework,” Economic Modelling, 7, 376–387.Google Scholar
Stone, Richard. 1961. Input–Output and National Accounts. Paris: Office of European Economic Cooperation.Google Scholar
Takayama, Akira. 1985. Mathematical Economics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Thage, Bent. 2002. “Symmetric Input–Output Tables and Quality Standards for Official Statistics.” Paper prepared for the 14th International Conference on Input–Output Techniques, October 10–15, 2002. Montréal, Canada.Google Scholar
Thage, Bent. 2005. “Symmetric Input–Output Tables: Quality Issues.” Paper prepared for the 15th International Conference on Input–Output Techniques, June 27 to July 1, 2005. Beijing.Google Scholar
Thage, Bent and ten Raa, Thijs. 2006. “Streamlining the SNA 1993 Chapter on Supply and Use Tables and Input–Output.” Paper prepared for the 29th General Conference of The International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, August 20–26, 2006. Joensuu, Finland.Google Scholar
United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. 1966. Problems of Input±Output Tables and Analysis, Series F, No. 14. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. 1968. A System of National Accounts. Studies in Methods, Series F, No. 2, rev. 3. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. 2018. Handbook on Supply, Use and Input–Output Tables with Extensions and Applications. Studies in Methods, Handbook of National Accounting, Series F, No. 74, rev. 1. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
United Nations, Eurostat, International Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, World Bank. 1993. A System of National Accounts, 1993. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
van Rijckeghem, W. 1967. “An Exact Method for Determining the Technology Matrix in a Situation with Secondary Products,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 49, 607–608.Google Scholar
Viet, Vu Quang. 1994. “Practices in Input–Output Table Compilation,” Regional Science and Urban Economics, 24, 27–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vollebregt, Michel and van Dalen, Jan. 2001. “Deriving Homogeneous Input/Output Tables from Supply and Use Tables,” Paper presented at the Fourteenth International Conference on Input–Output Techniques, Montreal, October, 2002. (Available at www.iioa.org/conferences/14th/papers.html.)Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×