| In the section | Surveys |
| Title of the article | Structural Core of the Region’s Economic System: Assessment Methods |
| Pages | 111-137 |
| Author 1 | Natalia Gennadyevna Zakharchenko Candidate Economics, Research Fellow Economic Research Institute FEB RAS 153 Tikhookeanskaya Street, Khabarovsk, Russia, 680042 This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. |
| Abstract | The article deals with methods of determining the structural core of the region’s economic system and assesses the possibilities of their integration or synthesis. The author discusses the calculation base issue and provides some solutions under testing the simultaneous stability of cost coefficients (Leontief model) and coefficients of resource needs (Ghosh model). There are two types of methods - index type methods (Rasmussen and Hirschman models) and hypothetical allocation methods (Cella, Clements, Dietzenbacher and Van der Linden, Miller and Lahr). Structural estimates of the economic system’s sector differ from its real scale, so the distinction of methods lies in coordination mechanism between evaluations and actual data. The author employs above-mentioned methods to analyze measures of sector’s structural relations that describe it both as a source of impulses and a supplier of resources. The paper also estimates the structural core of the economic system of the Khabarovsk Territory and concludes about complementarity of the two types of above-mentioned methods. |
| Code | 332.1:330.43 |
| DOI | 10.14530/se.2014.3.111-137 |
| Keywords | ♦ structural core ♦ economic system ♦ region ♦ «input-output» tables ♦ structural relations ♦ multiplier ♦ structural landscape ♦ hypothetical allocation ♦ Khabarovsk Territory |
| Download | SE.2014.3.111-137.Zakharchenko.pdf |
| For citation | Zakharchenko N.G. Structural Core of the Region’s Economic System: Assessment Methods. Prostranstvennaya Ekonomika = Spatial Economics, 2014, no. 3, pp. 111-137. DOI: 10.14530/se.2014.3.111-137. (In Russian). |
| References | 1. Aganbegyan A.G., Granberg A.G. Economic-Mathematical Analysis of the Input-Output Balance of the USSR. Moscow, 1968, 357 p. (In Russian). 2. Zakharchenko N.G., Dyomina O.V. Macroeconometric Simulation аs а Method оf Regional Studies. Prostranstvennaya Ekonomika = Spatial Economics, 2014, no. 1, pp. 40–64. DOI: 10.14530/se.2014.1.040-064. (In Russian). 3. Andreosso-O’Callaghan B., Yue G. Intersectoral Linkages and Key Sectors in China, 1987–1997. Asian Economic Journal, 2004, vol. 18 (2), pp. 165–183. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8381.2004.00188.x 4. Boucher M. Some Further Results on the Linkage Hypothesis. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1976, vol. 90 (2), pp. 313–318. DOI: 10.2307/1884633 5. Cella G. The Input-Output Measurement of Interindustry Linkages. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 1984, vol. 46, pp. 73–84. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0084.mp46001005.x 6. Chen Ch.-Y., Rose A. The Absolute and Relative Joint Stability of Input-Output Production and Allocation Coefficients. Advances in Input-Output Analysis: Technology, Planning and Development. Edited by W. Peterson. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991, pp. 25–36. 7. Clements B.J. On the Decomposition and Normalization of Interindustry Linkages. Economic Letters, 1990, vol. 33, pp. 337–340. DOI: 10.1016/0165-1765(90)90084-E 8. Davar E. Input-Output System Models: Leontief versus Ghosh. Proceedings of 15th International Input-Output Conference, 27 June – 1 July, 2005. Beijing, China, 17 p. Available at: https://www.iioa.org/conferences/15th/pdf/ezra_davar.pdf (accessed 03 April 2014). 9. Defourny J., Thorbecke E. Structural Path Analysis and Multiplier Decomposition within a Social Accounting Matrix Framework. The Economic Journal, March, 1984, vol. 94, no. 373, pp. 111–136. DOI: 10.2307/2232220 10. Dietzenbacher E. In Vindication of the Ghosh Model: A Reinterpretation as a Price Model. Journal of Regional Science, 1997, vol. 37 (4), pp. 629–651. DOI: 10.1111/0022-4146/00073 11. Dietzenbacher E., Van der Linden J.A., Steenge A.E. The Regional Extraction Method: EC Input-Output Comparisons. Economic System Research, 1993, vol. 5 (2), pp. 185–206. DOI: 10.1080/0953519300000017 12. Fernandez-Macho J., Gallastegui C., Gonzalez P. Economic Impacts of the Galician Fishing Sector: A Supply-Driven SAM Approach. Institute for Public Economics, Spain, 2004. Available at: www.soc.uoc.gr/asset/accepted.../paper59.pdf (accessed 15 May 2014). 13. Ghosh A. On the Mathematical Transformation of Input-Output Matrices over Time or Space. Advances in Input-Output Analysis: Technology, Planning and Development. Edited by W. Peterson. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991, pp. 17–24. 14. Groenewold N., Hagger A.J., Madden J.R. Measuring Industry Importance: an Australian Application. The Annals of Regional Science, 1993, vol. 27 (2), pp. 175–182. DOI: 10.1007/BF01581945 15. Guilhoto J.J.M., Crocomo F.C., Moretto A.C., Rorigues R.L. Comparative analysis of Brazil’s national and Regional Economic Structure, 1985, 1990, 1995. MPRA Paper No. 43066, 2001. Available at: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/id/eprint/43066 (accessed 15 May 2014). 16. Guo D., Hewings G.J.D. Comparative Analysis of China’s Economic Structures between 1987 and 1997: An Input-Output Prospective. Discussion Paper of the Regional Economics Applications Laboratory 01-T-04, May, 2001, 21 p. Available at: (accessed 10 May 2014). 17. Hazari B.R. Empirical Identification of Key Sectors in the Indian Economy. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 1970, vol. 52 (3), pp. 301–305. 18. Hewings G.J.D. The Empirical Identification of Key Sectors in an Economy: A Regional Perspective. The Developing Economies, 1982, vol. 20 (2), pp. 173–195. DOI: 10.1111/j.1746-1049.1982.tb00444.x 19. Hewings G.J.D., Sonis M., Guo J., Israilevich P.R., Schindler G.R. The Hollowing-Out Process in the Chicago Economy, 1975–2011. Geographical Analysis, 1998, vol. 30, issue 3, pp. 217–233. DOI: 10.1111/j.1538-4632.1998.tb00397.x 20. Jones L.P. The Measurement of Hirschmanian Linkages. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1976, vol. 90 (2), pp. 323–333. DOI: 10.2307/1884635 21. Karagiannis G., Tzouvelekas V. Sectoral Linkages and Industrial Efficiency: A Dilemma or a Requisition in Identifying Development Priorities? The Annals of Regional Science, 2010, vol. 45, issue 1, pp. 207–233. DOI: 10.1007/s00168-008-0280-5 22. Kelly S., Tyler P., Crawford-Brown D. The Economics of UK Infrastructure Using Key-Linkage Analysis. Working Paper of University of Cambridge, 4CMR. 2013. Available at: (accessed 20 April 2014). 23. Laumas P.S. The Weighting Problem in Testing the Linkage Hypothesis. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1976, vol. 90 (2), pp. 308–312. DOI: 10.2307/1884632 24. Luis R.T., Jesus S.S. Key Sectors: Big Coefficients and Important Coefficients in Spain. Department of Applied Economics, School of Economic Sciences and Business Studies, University of Malaga, 2005, 36 p. Available at: (accessed 27 April 2014). 25. Mattioli E., Lamonica G.R. The ICT Role in the World Economy: an Input-Output Analysis. Journal of World Economic Research, 2013, vol. 2 (2), pp. 20–25. DOI: 10.11648/j.jwer.20130202.11 26. McGilvray J.W. Linkages, Key Sectors and Development Strategy. Structure, System and Economic Policy: Proceedings of Section F of the British Association for the Advancement of Science Helt at the University of Lancaster 1–8 September 1976. Edited by W. Leontief. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977, pp. 49–56. 27. Mesnard L. The Variations of Technical and Allocation Coefficients are They Comparable Really? LATEC, Laboratoire d’Analyse et des Techniques EConomiques, CNRS UMR 5118, Universite de Bourgogne. Document De Travail – LATEC, May, 1995, 28. no. 9506. Available at: ?sequence=1 (accessed 16 May 2014). 29. Mesnard L. Biproportional Methods of Structural Change Analysis: A Typological Survey. Economic System Research, 2004, vol. 16 (2), pp. 205–230. DOI: 10.1080/0953531042000219312 30. Mesnard L. Is the Ghosh Model Interesting? Journal of Regional Science, 2009, vol. 49 (2), pp. 361–372. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9787.2008.00593.x 31. Mesnard L. On the Fallacy of Forward Linkages: A Note in the Light of Recent Results. University of Burgundy and CNRS Laboratoire d’Economie et de Gestion (UMR CNRS 5118), May, 2009. Available at: (accessed 07 May 2014). 32. Miller R.E., Blair P.D. Input-Output Analysis: Foundations and Extensions. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009, 750 p. 33. Miller R.E., Lahr M.L. A Taxonomy of Extractions. Regional Science Perspectives in Economics: A Festschrift in Memory of Benjamin H. Stevens. Edited by M.L. Lahr, R.E. Miller. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science, 2001, pp. 407–441. 34. Oosterhaven J. The Supply-Driven Input-Output Model: A New Interpretation but still Implausible. Journal of Regional Science, 1989, vol. 29 (3), pp. 459–465. 35. Oosterhaven J. Leontief Versus Ghoshian Price and Quantity Models. Southern Economic Journal, 1996, vol. 62 (3), pp. 750–759. 36. Oosterhaven J., Polenske K.R. Modern Regional Input-Output and Impact Analyses. Handbook of Regional Growth and Development Theories. Edited by R. Capello, P. Nijkamp. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2009, pp. 423–439. 37. Park J. Essays on Economic Modelling: Spatial-Temporal Extensions and Verification: A Dissertation for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy (Planning). University of Southern California, 2007, 191 p. 38. Rey S.J. The Performance of Alternative Integration Strategies for Combining Regional Econometric and Input-Output Models. International Regional Science Review, 1998, vol. 21 (1), pp. 1–35. DOI: 10.1177/016001769802100101 39. Rickman D.S., Miller S.R. An Evaluation of Alternative Strategies for Incorporating Interindustry Relationships into a Regional Employment Forecasting Model. The Review of Regional Studies, 2002, vol. 32 (1), pp. 133–147. 40. Riedel J. A Balanced-Growth Version of the Linkage Hypothesis: A Comment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1976, vol. 90 (2), pp. 319–322. DOI: 10.2307/1884634 41. Semerak V., Zigic K., Loizou E., Golemanova-Kuharova A. Regional Input-Output Analysis: Application on Rural Regions in Germany, the Czech Republic and Greece. Proceedings of 118 th Seminar of the European Association of Agricultural Economists, August 25–27, 2010. Ljubljana, Slovenia. Available at: http://purl.umn.edu/94904 (accessed 20 May 2014). 42. Sonis M. Mathematical Models Inspired by Empirical Regularities of Spatial Socio-Economic and Behavioral Sciences. 2006. Available at: (accessed 29 April 2014). 43. Sonis M., Guilhoto J.J.M., Hewings G.J.D., Martins E.B. Linkages, Key Sectors, and Structural Change: Some New Perspectives. The Developing Economies, 1995, vol. 33 (3), 44. pp. 233–246. DOI: 10.1111/j.1746-1049.1995.tb00716.x 45. Sonis M., Hewings G.J.D. New Developments in Input-Output Analysis: Fields of Influence of Changes, the Temporal Leontief Inverse and the Reconsideration of Classical Key Sector Analysis. Tool Kits in Regional Sciences: Theory, Models and Estimation. Edited by M. Sonis, G.J.D. Hewings. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2009, pp. 69–118. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-00627-2_1 46. Temurshoev U., Oosterhaven J. Analytical and Empirical Comparison of Policy-Relevant Key Sector Measures. Working Paper of Groningen Growth and Development Centre GD-132, April, 2013, 33 p. Available at: http://irs.ub.rug.nl/ppn/242411630 (accessed 47. April 2014). 48. Temurshoev U. Hypothetical Extraction and Fields of Influence Approaches: Integration and Policy Implications. Working Paper of the Economics Education and Research Consortium, CIS Research Network, July, 2009, 42 p. Available at: http://www.eerc.ru/paper?page=7 (accessed 25 April 2014). 49. Yotopoulos P.A., Nugent J.B. A Balanced-Growth Version of the Linkage Hypothesis: A Test. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1973, vol. 87 (2), pp. 157–171. DOI: 10.2307/1882181 50. Yotopoulos P.A., Nugent J.B. In Defense of a Test of the Linkage Hypothesis. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1976, vol. 90 (2), pp. 334–343. DOI: 10.2307/1884636 |
| Financing | |
| Date |