Author
Listed:
- Dennis P. Robinson
(U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Casey Bldg; Fort Belvoir VA 22060-5586, USA)
- Chung J. Liew
(University of Central Oklahoma, Economics Department, 100 N. University Dr., Edmond, OK. 73034-5209, USA)
Abstract
This study measures the time-period-specific industrial price and output effects of cost-related variables (transportation cost, wage rate, and interest rate) by utilizing the Dynamic Variable Input-Output (VIO) model. The Dynamic Variable Input-Output (VIO) model extends the static single regional version of the MultiRegional Variable Input-Output (MRVIO) model which is a partial general equilibrium model that incorporates the input-output model. By using the 15 sector industrial transaction table derived from the 1987 U.S. Benchmark input-output table for the constant-technology assumption case, and transaction tables derived from the 1987-1983 U.S. input-output tables for the varying-technology assumption case, we estimate cost-related variable effects on industrial price and output that are spread over several years. The dynamic price and output elasticities identify each period's impacts, and they add up to the static total price and output elasticities, respectively, when we adopt the constant-technology assumption. When we adopt the varying-technology assumption, each period's impacts do not add up to the neat dynamic totals. This study also finds that the initial period's price and output elasticities of the Dynamic VIO model are exactly the same as price and output elasticities of the static VIO model, thereby showing that the static VIO model underestimates the price and output impacts. Empirical results show that price elasticities are all positive for both own and cross impacts. Empirical results also show that output elasticities are negative for own impacts but mixed in sign for cross impacts because of the substituting behavior of firms and consumers. The distributions of both price and output elasticities reveal that ripple effects vary among different industries, over different time periods, among the cost-related variables, and between the two different technology assumptions. The distributions of both price and output impacts are more apparent during the first four or five periods. Hypotheses testings on the differences of mean elasticities between the two cases of technology assumptions show that under 10% level of significance, there are almost no differences in elasticities between the two cases of technology assumptions. However, as we increase the significance level, the total of five year periods' impacts show that they do differ under the two technology assumptions. Consequently, we recommend the use of constant technology for forecasting time horizons less than five years, and the use of varying-technology for forecasting time horizons longer than five years.
Suggested Citation
Dennis P. Robinson & Chung J. Liew, 2001.
"Measuring dynamic economic effects under the constant-technology versus varying-technology assumptions,"
The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 35(2), pages 299-331.
Handle:
RePEc:spr:anresc:v:35:y:2001:i:2:p:299-331
Note: Received: August 1998/Accepted: April 2000
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
More about this item
JEL classification:
- C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis
- C88 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Other Computer Software
- D57 - Microeconomics - - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium - - - Input-Output Tables and Analysis
- D58 - Microeconomics - - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium - - - Computable and Other Applied General Equilibrium Models
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:spr:anresc:v:35:y:2001:i:2:p:299-331. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.