Regional input–output tables and trade flows: an integrated and interregional non-survey approach

REFERENCES

• Alonso-Villar, O. (2007). A reflection on the effects of transport costs within the new economic geography. Review of Urban and Regional Development Studies, 19, 49–65. doi:10.1111/j.1467-940X.2007.00117.x
   Google Scholar
• Andrew, R. M., & Peters, G. P. (2013). A multi-region input–output table based on the global trade analysis project database (GTAP-MRIO). Economic Systems Research, 25, 99–121. doi:10.1080/09535314.2012.761953
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrew, R. M., Peters, G. P., & Lennox, J. (2009). Approximation and regional aggregation in multi-regional input–output analysis for national carbon footprint accounting. Economic Systems Research, 21, 311–335. doi:10.1080/09535310903541751
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bai, C.-E., Du, Y., Tao, Z., & Tong, S. Y. (2004). Local protectionism and regional specialization: Evidence from China’s industries. Journal of International Economics, 63(2), 397–417. doi:10.1016/S0022-1996(03)00070-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Belderbos, R., Capannelli, G., & Fukao, K. (2001). Backward vertical linkages of foreign manufacturing affiliates: Evidence from Japanese multinationals. World Development, 29(1), 189–208. doi:10.1016/S0305-750X(00)00086-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beyers, W. B., & Lin, T.-W. (2014). The 2007 Washington input–output study, full report, September 2014 revision. Olympia: Washington State Office of Financial Management.
   Google Scholar
• Bonfiglio, A., & Chelli, F. (2008). Assessing the behaviour of non-survey methods for constructing regional input–output tables through a Monte Carlo simulation. Economic Systems Research, 20, 243–258. doi:10.1080/09535310802344315
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boomsma, P., & Oosterhaven, J. (1992). A double-entry method for the construction of bi-regional input–output tables. Journal of Regional Science, 32, 269–284. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9787.1992.tb00186.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brander, J. A. (1981). Intra-industry trade in identical commodities. Journal of International Economics, 11, 1–14. doi:10.1016/0022-1996(81)90041-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Canning, P., & Wang, Z. (2005). A flexible mathematical programming model to estimate interregional input–output accounts. Journal of Regional Science, 45, 539–563. doi:10.1111/j.0022-4146.2005.00383.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Comer, J. C., & Jackson, R. W. (1997). A note on adjusting national input–output data for regional table construction. Journal of Regional Science, 37, 145–153. doi:10.1111/0022-4146.00047
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dewhurst, J. H. L. (1992). Using the RAS technique as a test of hybrid methods of regional input–output table updating. Regional Studies, 26, 81–91. doi:10.1080/00343409212331346791
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Escobedo, F., & Ureña, J. M. (2008). The influence of transport links on disaggregation and regionalization methods in interregional input–output models between metropolitan and remote areas. In R. Minguez, J. Sarabia, N. Balakrishnan, & B. C. Arnold (Eds.), Advances in mathematical and statistical modeling (pp. 231–241). Boston: Birkhäuser.
   Google Scholar
• EUROSTAT. (2008). EUROSTAT manual of supply, use and input–output tables. Luxembourg: EUROSTAT.
   Google Scholar
• Flegg, A. T., & Tohmo, T. (2013). Regional input–output tables and the FLQ formula: A case study of Finland. Regional Studies, 47, 703–721. doi:10.1080/00343404.2011.592138
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flegg, A. T., & Webber, C. D. (2000). Regional size, regional specialization and the FLQ formula. Regional Studies, 34(6), 563–569. doi:10.1080/00343400050085675
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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. doi:10.1080/00343409512331349173
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flegg, A. T., Webber, C. D., & Elliott, M. V. (1997). On the appropriate use of location quotients in generating regional input–output tables: Reply. Regional Studies, 31, 795–805. doi:10.1080/713693401
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frechtling, D. C., & Horvath, E. (1999). Estimating the multiplier effects of tourism expenditures on a local economy through a regional input–output model. Journal of Travel Research, 37(4), 324–332. doi:10.1177/004728759903700402
   Google Scholar
• Harris, R. I., & Liu, A. (1998). Input-output modelling of the urban and regional economy: The importance of external trade. Regional Studies, 32, 851–862. doi:10.1080/00343409850118004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isard, W. (1951). Interregional and regional input–output analysis: A model of a space-economy. Review of Economics and Statistics, 33, 318–328. doi:10.2307/1926459
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isard, W., Azis, I. J., Drennan, M. P., Miller, R. E., Saltzman, S., & Thorbecke, E. (1998). Methods of interregional and regional analysis. Aldershot: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Isserman, A. M. (1977). The location quotient approach to estimating regional economic impacts. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 43, 33–41. doi:10.1080/01944367708977758
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jensen, R. C. (1990). Construction and use of regional input–output models: Progress and prospects. International Regional Science Review, 13, 9–25. doi:10.1177/016001769001300102
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kowalewksi, J. (2015). Regionalization of national input–output tables: Empirical evidence on the use of the FLQ formula. Regional Studies, 49(2), 240–250. doi:10.1080/00343404.2013.766318
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kronenberg, T. (2009). Construction of regional input–output tables using nonsurvey methods: The role of cross-hauling. International Regional Science Review, 32, 40–64. doi:10.1177/0160017608322555
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krugman, P., & Venables, A. (1993). Integration, specialization, and the adjustment (Working Paper No. w4559). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER). doi:10.3386/w4559
   Google Scholar
• Lahr, M. L. (1993). A review of the literature supporting the hybrid approach to constructing regional input–output models. Economic Systems Research, 5, 277–293. doi:10.1080/09535319300000023
   Google Scholar
• Lehtonen, O., & Tykkyläinen, M. (2014). Estimating regional input coefficients and multipliers: Is the choice of a non-survey technique a gamble? Regional Studies, 48(2), 382–399. doi:10.1080/00343404.2012.657619
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leontief, W., & Strout, A. (1963). Multiregional input–output analysis. In T. Barna (Ed.), Structural interdependence and economic development (pp. 119–149). London: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, R. E., & Blair, P. (1983). Estimating state-level input–output relationships from U.S. multiregional data. International Regional Science Review, 8, 233–254. doi:10.1177/016001768300800304
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, R. E., & Blair, P. (2009). Input–output analysis, foundations and extensions (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• 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. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9787.1974.tb00425.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson, B. (2000). CFS multi-modal network documentation. Oak Ridge: Center for Transportation Analysis.
   Google Scholar
• Riddington, G., Gibson, H., & Anderson, J. (2006). Comparison of gravity model, survey and location quotient-based local area tables and multipliers. Regional Studies, 40, 1069–1081. doi:10.1080/00343400601047374
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson, S., Cattaneo, A., & El-Said, M. (2001). Updating and estimating a social accounting matrix using cross entropy methods. Economic Systems Research, 13, 47–64. doi:10.1080/09535310120026247
   Google Scholar
• Round, J. I. (1972). Regional input–output models in the U.K.: A re-appraisal of some techniques. Regional Studies, 6, 1–9. doi:10.1080/09595237200185011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Round, J. I. (1983). Nonsurvey techniques: A critical review of the theory and the evidence. International Regional Science Review, 8, 189–212. doi:10.1177/016001768300800302
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savard, L. (2003). Poverty and income distribution in a CGE-household micro-simulation model: Top-down/bottom-up approach (CIRPEE Working Paper No. 03-43). Montreal: CIRPEE.
   Google Scholar
• Schaffer, W. A., & Chu, K. (1969). Nonsurvey techniques for constructing regional interindustry models. Papers of the Regional Science Association, 23(1), 83–101. doi:10.1007/BF01941876
   Google Scholar
• Shao, G., & Miller, R. E. (1990). Demand-side and supply-side commodity-industry multiregional input–output models and spatial linkages in the US regional economy. Economic Systems Research, 2, 385–406. doi:10.1080/09535319000000029
   Google Scholar
• Stevens, B. H., & Trainer, G. A. (1976). The generation of error in regional input–output impact models (Working Paper No. A1-76). Amherst: Regional Science Research Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Stevens, B. H., & Trainer, G. A. (1980). Error generation in regional input–output analysis and its implications for nonsurvey methods. In S. Pleeter (Ed.), Economic impact analysis: Methodology and applications (pp. 68–84). Boston: Martinus Nijhoff.
   Google Scholar
• Thissen, M., Diodato, D., & Van Oort, F. G. (2013). Integrated regional Europe: European regional trade flows in 2000 (Publication No. 1035). The Hague: PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency.
   Google Scholar
• Tohmo, T. (2004). New developments in the use of location quotients to estimate regional input–output coefficients and multipliers. Regional Studies, 38, 43–54. doi:10.1080/00343400310001632262
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trigg, A. B., & Madden, M. (1994). Using a demand system to estimate extended input–output multipliers. Economic Systems Research, 6, 385–395. doi:10.1080/09535319400000031
   Google Scholar
• Turok, I. (1993). Inward investment and local linkages: How deeply embedded is ‘Silicon Glen’? Regional Studies, 27(5), 401–417. doi:10.1080/00343409312331347655
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Wissen, L. (2000). A micro-simulation model of firms: Applications of concepts of the demography of the firm. Papers in Regional Science, 79(2), 111–134. doi:10.1007/s101100050039
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• West, G. R., Morison, J. B., & Jensen, R. C. (1984). A method for the estimation of hybrid interregional input–output tables. Regional Studies, 18(5), 413–421. doi:10.1080/09595238400185411
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar