IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/retrec/v31y2011i1p12-18.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Challenges in the application of spatial computable general equilibrium models for transport appraisal

Author

Listed:
  • Tavasszy, L.A.
  • Thissen, M.J.P.M.
  • Oosterhaven, J.

Abstract

The use of spatial computable general equilibrium (SCGE) models for assessing the economic impacts of transport projects is one of the key items on the research agenda for project appraisal in the Netherlands. These models are particularly suitable for analysing indirect effects of transport projects through linkages between the transport sector and the wider economy. Potentially, according to the literature, indirect effects that are additional to first-order direct cost reductions can turn out to be up to almost 80% in magnitude of the direct impacts. Given the relevance of these models for policy appraisal, experiences with this new modelling approach are important to report. After two years of development and application of SCGE models for transport appraisal, we found that the translation of theory behind the spatial equilibrium models into practical model specifications and empirical applications is a challenging task, and may lead to problems in project appraisal in terms of inaccuracies in the assessment of impacts. This paper discusses some key challenges we encountered with the specification of the Dutch SCGE model RAEM. This chapter is especially useful for researchers developing SCGE applications for use in transport appraisal and those who want to get a better understanding of differences between theoretical and computable SCGE modelling.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:retrec:v:31:y:2011:i:1:p:12-18
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0739-8859(10)00125-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dixit, Avinash K & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1977. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 297-308, June.
    2. 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.
    3. Venables, Anthony J, 1996. "Equilibrium Locations of Vertically Linked Industries," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 37(2), pages 341-359, May.
    4. Piet Rietveld & Frank Bruinsma, 1998. "Is Transport Infrastructure Effective?," Advances in Spatial Science, Springer, number 978-3-642-72232-5, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ishikura, Tomoki & Yoshikawa, Hiroshi & Yokoyama, Fuga, 2019. "Spatial economic impacts of ring road highway development in the Greater Tokyo Area," Conference papers 333027, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    2. Shuji Sugimori & Yoshitsugu Hayashi & Hiroyuki Takeshita & Tomohiko Isobe, 2022. "Evaluating the Regional Economic Impacts of High-Speed Rail and Interregional Disparity: A Combined Model of I/O and Spatial Interaction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-13, September.
    3. Ioannis Charalampidis & Panagiotis Karkatsoulis & Pantelis Capros, 2019. "A Regional Economy-Energy-Transport Model of the EU for Assessing Decarbonization in Transport," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-27, August.
    4. Cai, Yongxia & Woollacott, Jared & Beach, Robert H. & Rafelski, Lauren E. & Ramig, Christopher & Shelby, Michael, 2023. "Insights from adding transportation sector detail into an economy-wide model: The case of the ADAGE CGE model," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    5. 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.
    6. Tomoki Ishikura & Fuga Yokoyama, 2022. "Regional economic effects of the Ring Road project in the Greater Tokyo Area: A spatial CGE approach," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 101(4), pages 811-837, August.
    7. Piotr Rosik & Julia Wójcik, 2022. "Transport Infrastructure and Regional Development: A Survey of Literature on Wider Economic and Spatial Impacts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-19, December.
    8. Robson, Edward N. & Wijayaratna, Kasun P. & Dixit, Vinayak V., 2018. "A review of computable general equilibrium models for transport and their applications in appraisal," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 31-53.
    9. Bröcker, Johannes & Korzhenevych, Artem, 2013. "Forward looking dynamics in spatial CGE modelling," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 389-400.
    10. Edward N. Robson & Vinayak V. Dixit, 2017. "A General Equilibrium Framework for Integrated Assessment of Transport and Economic Impacts," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 989-1013, September.
    11. Hensher, David A. & Teye, Collins, 2019. "Commodity interaction in freight movement models for New South Wales," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).

    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. Picard, Pierre M. & Toulemonde, Eric, 2006. "Firms agglomeration and unions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 669-694, April.
    3. Laura Resmini, 2003. "Economic integration and regional patterns of industry location in transition countries," ERSA conference papers ersa03p399, European Regional Science Association.
    4. Alberto Franco Pozzolo, 2004. "Research and Development, Regional Spillovers and the Location of Economic Activities," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 72(4), pages 463-482, July.
    5. Gianmarco I P Ottaviano & Jacques-François Thisse, 2005. "New Economic Geography: What about the N?," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 37(10), pages 1707-1725, October.
    6. Baldwin, Richard E. & Krugman, Paul, 2004. "Agglomeration, integration and tax harmonisation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 1-23, February.
    7. Fugazza, Marco & Robert-Nicoud, Frédéric, 2006. "Can South-South trade Liberalisation Stimulate North-South Trade ?," Journal of Economic Integration, Center for Economic Integration, Sejong University, vol. 21, pages 234-253.
    8. J.Peter Neary, 2001. "Of Hype and Hyperbolas: Introducing the New Economic Geography," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 39(2), pages 536-561, June.
    9. G Ottaviano & Diego Puga, 1997. "Agglomeration in a global Economy: A Survey," CEP Discussion Papers dp0356, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    10. Antonella Nocco, 2009. "Preference Heterogeneity And Economic Geography," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(1), pages 33-56, February.
    11. Boiscuvier, Éléonore, 2001. "Innovation, intégration et développement régional," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 77(2), pages 255-280, juin.
    12. Puga, Diego & Venables, Anthony J., 1996. "The Spread of Industry: Spatial Agglomeration in Economic Development," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 440-464, December.
    13. Puga, Diego & Venables, Anthony J., 1997. "Preferential trading arrangements and industrial location," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(3-4), pages 347-368, November.
    14. Andrea Gauselmann & Philipp Marek, 2012. "Regional determinants of MNE’s location choice in post-transition economies," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 39(4), pages 487-511, November.
    15. Pflüger, Michael & Tabuchi, Takatoshi, 2010. "The size of regions with land use for production," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 481-489, November.
    16. J. Peter Neary, 2009. "Putting the “New” into New Trade Theory: Paul Krugman's Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 111(2), pages 217-250, June.
    17. Ronald W. Jones & Henryk Kierzkowski, 2018. "International Fragmentation and the New Economic Geography," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: International Trade Theory and Competitive Models Features, Values, and Criticisms, chapter 17, pages 281-293, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    18. Méjean, Isabelle, 2008. "Can firms' location decisions counteract the Balassa-Samuelson effect?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 139-154, December.
    19. Karolina Ekholm & Katariina Hakkala, 2007. "Location of R&D and High-Tech Production by Vertically Integrated Multinationals," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 117(518), pages 512-543, March.
    20. Henry Overman & Stephen Redding & Anthony J. Venables, 2001. "The Economic Geography of Trade, Production, and Income: A Survey of Empirics," CEP Discussion Papers dp0508, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.

    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:eee:retrec:v:31:y:2011:i:1:p:12-18. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/620614/description#description .

    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.