Estimating interregional economic impacts: an evaluation of nonsurvey, semisurvey, and full-survey methods
Literature shows that nonsurvey input - output tables tend to produce regional multipliers with systematic upward biases. This paper explores the related, relatively uncharted territory of nonsurvey versus survey impact studies by means of a series of simulations. The base case is provided by a very detailed five region survey of both the forward and the backward impacts of the energy-distribution sector in the four northern provinces of the Netherlands. To deal adequately with the two-sided dependence between a firm or sector and a region, as opposed to using the traditional (gross) multipliers, we argue in favor of using a new multiplier concept: the net multiplier. Next, from examining alternative impact study methods ranging from quick and dirty, via semiextensive, to full-survey methods, we conclude that using even aggregate, first-order impact information is more important than using a very detailed survey-based input - output model.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pio:envira:v:35:y:2003:i:1:p:5-18. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Neil Hammond)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.