IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa12p333.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An Analysis on Differences in Spatial Computable General Equilibrium Models by Market Structure Assumption -A Comparison of Perfect Competition Modeling and Monopolistic Competition Modeling-

Author

Listed:
  • Tomoki Ishikura
  • Atsushi Koike
  • Keisuke Sato

Abstract

Spatial Computable General Equilibrium (SCGE) models are convenient methods of the analysis of the change of inter-regional economic interaction or regional benefit by policy shocks. Recent SCGE models have two main streams in terms of the assumption of market structure; perfect competition models and monopolistic competition models. Benefit measured by perfect competition based models is usually independent of economy of scale and therefore the policy assessment result is consistent with normal cost-benefit analysis. It is an important factor for practical welfare analysis when validity of policy implementation is discussed from a point of view of efficiency. On the other hand, monopolistic competition based models is suitable to theoretical framework of new economic geography field which highlights the economic agglomeration. Agglomeration effect is also an important factor from a point of view of regional economic development effects. Thus the both of two types of models have theoretical and practical merits respectively. However, the results of the model analyses of course depend on the model formulations and can be different in not only detail but also feature of benefit distribution. Understanding the difference of the model outputs by theoretical assumption is crucial theme of practical policy assessment. This paper attempts to compare the economic effects of a road transport development project estimated by a perfect competition based SCGE model and a monopolistic competition based SCGE model quantitatively. Our analysis emphasizes especially the differences in the magnitude of benefit and the regional distribution pattern of benefit because they are usually the largest interests of actual policy assessments. The results show that elasticity of substitution, which is a dominant parameter of monopolistic competition models as a key factor of markup, sensitively affects to benefit and its distribution. It mainly causes the difference of the outputs of the perfect competition based SCGE model and the monopolistic competition model, which implies that the elasticity parameter should be chosen carefully. We furthermore analyze the relationship between size of analysis target region and benefit as well as sensitivity analysis of model parameters. The analysis shows that the regional scale also influences to the benefit estimation in particular by monopolistic competition model. Finally, we summarize the tendency of model outputs of the two types of the models and points to keep in mind for the practical policy analysis by SCGE models. Key words: Spatial Computable General Equilibrium model, Perfect Competition, Monopolistic Competition JEL Classification: C68, R13, O18 Other Choice of Theme: H. Infrastructure, Transport and Communications

Suggested Citation

  • Tomoki Ishikura & Atsushi Koike & Keisuke Sato, 2012. "An Analysis on Differences in Spatial Computable General Equilibrium Models by Market Structure Assumption -A Comparison of Perfect Competition Modeling and Monopolistic Competition Modeling-," ERSA conference papers ersa12p333, European Regional Science Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa12p333
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa12/e120821aFinal00335.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thijs Knaap & Jan Oosterhaven & Lóri Tavasszy, 2001. "On the development of raem: The dutch spatial general equilibrium model and it's first application to a new railway link," ERSA conference papers ersa01p171, European Regional Science Association.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mark Thissen & Narisra Limtanakool & Hans Hilbers, 2011. "Road pricing and agglomeration economies: a new methodology to estimate indirect effects applied to the Netherlands," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 47(3), pages 543-567, December.
    2. Andersson, Matts & Dehlin, Fredrik & Jörgensen, Peter & Pädam, Sirje, 2015. "Wider economic impacts of accessibility: a literature survey," Working papers in Transport Economics 2015:14, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    3. Hensher, David A. & Teye, Collins, 2019. "Commodity interaction in freight movement models for New South Wales," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    4. Simmonds, David & Feldman, Olga, 2011. "Alternative approaches to spatial modelling," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 2-11.
    5. Varga, Attila & Járosi, Péter & Koike, Atsushi & Thissen, Mark, 2010. "Regionális fejlesztéspolitikai hatáselemzés térbeli számszerűsített általános egyensúlyi modellel [Effect analysis of regional development policy using a spatial, numerical model of general equilib," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(2), pages 165-180.
    6. Alfried BRAUMANN & Christoph SCHMID, 2010. "New Road Transport Infrastructure and Sectoral Regional Growth: A SCGE Analysis for the A4 Extension to the Austrian-Hungarian Border," Regional and Urban Modeling 284100010, EcoMod.
    7. Bert Hof & Arjan Heyma & Toon Hoorn, 2012. "Comparing the performance of models for wider economic benefits of transport infrastructure: results of a Dutch case study," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(6), pages 1241-1258, November.
    8. Karl Steininger & Alfried Braumann & Hannes Pichler & Erik Schaffer & Christoph Schmid, 2000. "New Primary Road Transport Infrastructure and the Development of Spatial Distribution of Growth: A SCGE Analysis for an Eastern Austrian Border Region," Regional and Urban Modeling 283600091, EcoMod.
    9. Mark Thissen & Hans Hilbers & Paul Van De Coevering, 2009. "The Difference Between Bi‐Regional And Full Networks When Analysing Agglomeration Effects," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 100(2), pages 171-182, April.
    10. repec:mul:je8794:doi:10.1429/34355:y:2011:i:1:p:125 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Attila Varga & Péter Járosi & Tamás Sebestyén, 2011. "Modeling the growth effects of regional knowledge production: The GMR-Europe model and its applications for EU Framework Program policy impact simulations," ERSA conference papers ersa11p1426, European Regional Science Association.
    12. Tavasszy, L.A. & Thissen, M.J.P.M. & Oosterhaven, J., 2011. "Challenges in the application of spatial computable general equilibrium models for transport appraisal," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 12-18.
    13. Ying Jin & Marcial Echenique & Anthony Hargreaves, 2013. "A Recursive Spatial Equilibrium Model for Planning Large-Scale Urban Change," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 40(6), pages 1027-1050, December.
    14. Siroos Shahriari & Edward N. Robson & Jason Wang & Vinayak V. Dixit & S. Travis Waller & Taha H. Rashidi, 2023. "Integrating a computable general equilibrium model with the four-step framework," Transportation, Springer, vol. 50(4), pages 1213-1260, August.
    15. Sánchez-Díaz, Iván, 2017. "Modeling urban freight generation: A study of commercial establishments’ freight needs," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 3-17.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    spatial computable general equilibrium model; perfect competition; monopolistic competition jel classification: c68; r13; o18 other choice of theme: h. infrastructure; transport and communications;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C68 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computable General Equilibrium Models
    • R13 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - General Equilibrium and Welfare Economic Analysis of Regional Economies
    • O18 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Urban, Rural, Regional, and Transportation Analysis; Housing; Infrastructure

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa12p333. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Gunther Maier (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ersa.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.