Using geolocation data in spatial-econometric construction of multiregion input-output tables: a Bayesian approach

• Autorzy: Andrzej Torój
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Interregional input-output tables for Poland at NUTS-3 level are built by using the Bayesian approach to spatial econometric analysis. I apply the multi-equation Durbin specification proposed by Torój (2021) to derive the sample density and Statistics Finland (2006) regional I-O tables to derive the prior hyperparameters. This prior aims to introduce additional information in the presence of noisy spatial data, but also to avoid the areas where the spatial decay profiles representing the supply geography become insensitive to the parameter values of the selected functional form. To measure the distance, the real-world driving distance between the most populated cities of the regions from Google Maps is used. Posterior distrubutions indicate that the agricultural commodities and advanced services are supplied to the most distant locations, whereas the simple services - to the least distant ones; the result for the former group of sectors is characterized with the highest uncertainty. The illustrative simulation indicates that 82.2% of the indirect effects occur in the home region, with a posterior-based confidence interval from 71.5% to 92.4%. The results do not change qualitatively when I use the driving time (averaged over 42 equidistant moments in a 7-day week) as the alternative measure of distance, but the hybrid time- and distance-based model is strongly preferred in the Bayes factor comparison, since for all sectors except industry (NACE sections B-E), the time-based metric turned out to be dominant. When commuting is taken into account in the induced effect calculation (measured with mobile geolocation data), 4.9% of the induced effects are relocated from the home region (central point in a big agglomeration) to the other regions, especially the surrounding "ring". (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Input-Output study; Input-output tables; Spatial analysis; Spatial econometrics; Bayesian estimation; Regional analysis; Regional economy

PL

Badanie input-output (IO); Tablice przepływów międzygałęziowych; Analiza przestrzenna; Ekonometria przestrzenna; Estymacja bayesowska; Analiza regionalna; Gospodarka regionalna

• Czasopismo: Collegium of Economic Analysis SGH - Working Papers
• Rocznik: 2022
• Numer: nr 69
• Strony: 33

Twórcy

autor

Andrzej Torój

• CEA SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Poland

Bibliografia

• Bonfiglio A. (2009): On the parametrization of techniques for representing regional economic structures, Economic Systems Research, 21(2), 115-127.
• Flegg A., Tohmo T. (2013a): Estimating Regional Input Coefficients and Multipliers: The Use of FLQ is Not a Gamble, Regional Studies, 50(2), 310-325, dOI: 10.1080/00343404.2014.901499.
• Flegg A., Tohmo T. (2013b): Regional Input-Output Table and the FLQ Formula: A Case Study for Finland, Regional Studies, 47(5), 703-721.
• Flegg A.T., Tohmo T. (2016): Estimating Regional Input Coefficients and Multipliers: The Use of FLQ is Not a Gamble, Regional Studies, 50(2), 310-325.
• Flegg A.T., Webber C.D., Elliott M.V. (1995): On the Appropriate Use of Location Quotients in Generating Regional Input-Output Tables, Regional Studies, 29, 547-561.
• Folmer H., Nijkamp P. (1985): Methodological aspects of impact analysis of regional economic policy, Papers of the Regional Science Association, 57(1), 165-181.
• Gordon I.R. (1976): Gravity Demand Functions, Accessibility and Regional Trade, Regional Studies, 10, 25-37.
• Gronaua Q.F., Singmann H., Wagenmakers E.J. (2020): bridgesampling: An R Package for Estimating Normalizing Constants, Journal of Statistical Software, (92(10)), 1-29.
• Haining R., Li G. (2020): Modelling Spatial and Spatial-Temporal Data: A Bayesian Approach, CRC Press.
• Jackson R.W., Schwarm W.R., Okuyama Y., Islam S. (2006): A Method for Constructing Commodity by Industry Flow Matrices, Annals of Regional Science, 40, 909-920.
• Jahn M. (2017): Extending the FLQ formula: a location quotient-based interregional input-output framework, Regional Studies, 51(10), 1518-1529.
• Kass R.E., Raftery A.E. (1995): Bayes Factors, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90(430), 773-795.
• Kronenberg T. (2009): Construction of Regional Input-Output Tables Using Nonsurvey Methods: The Role of Cross-Hauling, International Regional Science Review, (32), 40-64.
• Lamonica G.R., Chelli F.M. (2017): The performance of non-survey techniques for constructing sub-territorial input-output tables, Papers in Regional Science, doi:10.1111/pirs.12297.
• Lamonica G.R., Recchioni M.C., Chelli F.M., Salvati L. (2020): The efficiency of the cross-entropy method when estimating the technical coefficients of input-output tables, Spatial Economic Analysis, 15(1), 62-91.
• Leontief W., Strout A. (1963): Structural Interdependence and Economic Development, chapter Multiregional Input-Output Analysis, 119-149, London: Macmillan (St. Martin's Press).
• LeSage J.P., Pace R.K. (2009): Introduction to Spatial Econometrics, Chapman & Hall.
• Lindall S., Olson D., Alward G. (2006): Deriving Multi-Regional Models Using the IMPLAN National Trade Flows Model, Journal of Regional Analysis and Policy, 36, 76-83.
• Loveridge S. (2004): A Typology and Assessment of Multi-sector Regional Economic Impact Models, Regional Studies, 38(3), 305-317.
• Meng X., Schilling S. (2002): Warp Bridge Sampling, Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 11(3), 552-586.
• Meng X.L., Wong W.H. (1996): Simulating Ratios of Normalizing Constants via a Simple Identity: A Theoretical Exploration, Statistica Sinica, (6), 831-860.
• Miller R.E., Blair P.D. (2009): Input-Output Analysis. Foundations and Extensions, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• Morrison W.I., Smith P. (1974): Nonsurvey input-output techniques at the small area level: an evaluation, Journal of Regional Science, 14(1), 1-14.
• Polenske K.R. (1970): An Empirical Test of Interregional Input-Output Models: Estimation of 1963 Japanese Production, American Economic Review, 60, 76-82.
• Rey S.J. (2000): Integrated regional econometric + input-output modeling: Issues and opportunities, Papers in Regional Science, 79(3), 271-292.
• Round J.I. (1978): An interregional input-output approach to the evaluation of nonsurvey methods, Journal of Regional Science, 18, 179-194.
• Statistics Finland (2006): Construction of Regional Input-Output Tables in Finland 2002, 46th Congress of the European Regional Science Association: "Enlargement, Southern Europe and the Mediterranean", August 30th - September 3rd, 2006, Volos, Greece.
• Stone R. (1961): Input-Output and National Accounts, OECD, Paris.
• Temursho U., Oosterhaven J., Cardenete M.A. (2021): A multi-regional generalized RAS updating technique, Spatial Economic Analysis.
• Tobler W. (1970): A computer movie simulating urban growth in the Detroit region, Economic Geography, 46(Supplement), 234-240.
• Torój A. (2016): Regional Economic Impact Assessment with Missing Input-Output Data: A Spatial Econometrics Approach for Poland, Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics, 8, 61-91.
• Torój A. (2021): Construction of multiregion-multisector input-output tables: a spatial econometric approach for Poland, Spatial Economic Analysis, 16(4), 550-569.
• Wiedmann T., Wilting H.C., Lenzen M., Lutter S., Palm V. (2011): Quo Vadis MRIO? Methodological, data and institutional requirements for multi-region input-output analysis, Ecological Economics, 70, 1937-1945.
• Yamagata Y., Seya H. (eds.) (2020): Spatial Analysis Using Big Data. Methods and Urban Applications, Elsevier.

Identyfikatory

DOI

https://cor.sgh.waw.pl/bitstream/handle/20.500.12182/1126/WPKAE_2022_069.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y