Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T05:19:55.982Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Forecasting Imports: A Re-Examination

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 March 2020

I. G. Black ,
J. E. Kidgell  and
G. F. Ray
I. G. Black
Affiliation:
National Institute
J. E. Kidgell
Affiliation:
National Institute
G. F. Ray
Affiliation:
National Institute
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This article was prepared before the announcement of the devaluation of sterling on 18 November 1967

In August 1965, an article in this Review considered the problem of the short-term forecasting of imports into this country. It argued that some aggregate relationship was probably necessary, for forecasting total imports of goods and services, mainly because stockbuilding appeared to have an important and distinctive influence on imports. The import content of stockbuilding seemed to be much higher than the import content of other forms of expenditure. It was not possible to distinguish the separate influence of stockbuilding on different categories of imports—food, basic materials, fuel, and so on.

Type
Research Article
Information
National Institute Economic Review , Volume 42 , November 1967 , pp. 52 - 57
Copyright
Copyright © 1967 National Institute of Economic and Social Research

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

note (1) page 52 W. A. H. Godley and J. R. Shepherd, ‘Forecasting imports’, National Institute Economic Review No. 33, August 1965, page 35.

note (2) page 52 That is, imports of goods and services at constant (1958) prices.

note (3) page 52 Given that the discrepancy is a discrepancy between estimates of gross domestic product at factor cost, the coeffi cient should strictly speaking be compared with the coefficient which would be obtained for total final sales if the equations had been run throughout at factor cost. Had they been so run, the coefficients for total final sales in equations (1) to (3) would probably have been about 10 per cent higher. So the equation results do not in fact suggest a disproportionately high stockbuilding content in the unidentified expenditure.

note (4) page 52 The two equations recommended were as follows :

where M=Imports of goods and services; F=Final sales; S=Stockbuilding; t=Time trend; D=Difference between expenditure and ‘compromise’ estimate of gross domestic product; P=Public authorities’ current expenditure; I= Gross fixed investment; and X=Exports. Standard errors are shown in brackets beneath regression coefficients.

note (5) page 52 The constant term was positive. This implies that the average import content of total final sales at the beginning of the period was slightly higher than at the end of the period.

note (6) page 52 The marginal import contents implied were 30 per cent for consumers' expenditure, 7 per cent for public authorities' current expenditure, 1 per cent for gross fixed investment, and 24 per cent for exports. There is such a high degree of inter correlation between all the components of final sales that it is not surprising that regression analysis fails to distinguish the individual coefficients satisfactorily.

note (1) page 53 An extensive exercise in the use of this approach was carried out by J. Johnston and Margaret Henderson, Assessing the effects of the import surcharge, The Manchester School of Economic and Social Studies, May 1967.

note (2) page 53 The series used were those given in Economic Trends, October 1967.

note (3) page 53 The constant term in the equation was negative.

note (4) page 53 The 1963 coefficients used in this equation were not, however, very different from those for 1954 (shown in the equation in footnote (4), page 52.

note (5) page 53 Johnson and Henderson estimated a total import savings effect of £100-150 million.

note (1) page 54 The figures in this paragraph are in fact for the annual average changes from 1958-60 to 1964-66.

note (2) page 54 Harvests were better in the second period; increased importance of animal husbandry and modern methods made agriculture less dependent on the weather; with the spread of convenience (and, in general, more processed) food the ‘processing’ content, mainly performed in the United Kingdom, of expenditure has been growing; agricultural policy helped too (one example is the increase of the area under sugarbeet).

note (1) page 57 On a balance of payments basis.

note (2) page 57 Allowing for £20 million special stockbuilding of sur charged goods.