Different Interpretation of Technology Assumption in Iran’s Symmetric Input-Output Tables and Its Impact on Oil and Gas Investment Perspective

Authors

Abstract

In Iran, the Symmetric Input-Output Tables (SIOTs) are calculated by
two Institutes i.e the Central Bank (CB) and Statistical Center of Iran
(SCI). The Central Bank always supports the industry technology
assumption in order to avoid emergence of negative elements, the
challenges facing their removal and re-balancing of the SIOT. On the
contrary, Iran Statistical Center was initially in support of the same
technology assumption, while in 2001 it placed the phrase” mainly
commodity technology assumption with some adjustment based on the
mixed technology assumption” as the basis for calculation of its
symmetric table.
Findings of the paper indicate that different interpretations of
technology assumption and modifications conducted by such institutes
lead to different policy implications on the priority of sectoral
investment. Also adjustment made by the SCI is more considerable
than that of the CB. This same issue has not only led to notable
differences in the incremental coefficients of goods production, but
also has changed investment priority among commodity groups.

Keywords

References

1. بانک مرکزی جمهوری اسلامی ایران (1384). «جدول داده ـ ستانده ایران سال 1378»، تهران.
2. بانوئی، علی‌اصغر، سیدهادی موسوی‌نیک، مجتبی اسفندیاری کلوکن، رضا وفایی یگانه، زهرا ذاکری و مهدی کرمی (1392). «ارزیابی روش‌های محاسبه جداول متقارن داده ـ ستانده با تأکید بر برداشت‌های مختلف از فرض تکنولوژی در ایران»، فصلنامه مجلس و راهبرد.
3. مرکز آمار ایران (1386). «جدول داده ـ ستانده ایران سال 1380»، تهران.
4. مهاجری، پریسا، علی‌اصغر بانوئی، محمد جلوداری ممقانی، عباس شاکری و منوچهر عسگری (1392). «به‌کارگیری الگوریتم ریاضی آلمن در حذف درایه منفی جدول متقارن داده ـ ستانده با فرض تکنولوژی کالا»، فصلنامه علمی ـ پژوهشی پژوهش‌های اقتصادی.
5. Almon, C. (2000). "Product-to-Product Table Via Product-Technology with No Negative Flow", Economic Systems Research, 12.
6. De Mesnard, L. (2011). "Negative in Symmetric Input-Output Tables: The Impossible Quest for the Holy Grail", Annals of Regional Science, Vol. 46, No. 2.
7. _____. (2009). "Is The Ghosh Model Interesting?", Journal of Regional Science, Vol. 49, No. 2.
8. _____. (2004). "Understanding the Shortcomings of Commodity-Based Technology in Input-Output Models: An Economic-Circuit Approach", Journal of Regional Science, Vol. 44, No. 1.
9. Eurostat (2008). "Eurostat Manual of Supply, Use and Input-Output Tables", Luxembourg.
10. Jansen, P. K. and T. Ten Raa (1990). "The Choice of Model in Construction of Input-Output Coefficient Matrices" International Economic Review, Vol. 31.
11. Stone, R. (1961). "Input-Output and National Accounts", OECD, Paris.
12. Rainer, N. and J. Ritcher, (1992). "Some Aspects of the Analytical Use of Descriptive Make and Absorption Table", Economic System Research, Vol. 4.
13. Steenge, A. E. (1990). "The Commodity Technology Revisited: Theoretical Base and Application in the Make-Use Framework", Economic Modeling, Vol. 21.
14. Ten Raa, T. and J. M. Rueda Cantuche (2007). "A Generalized Expression for the Commodity and the Industry Technology Models in Input-Output Analysis", Economic Systems Research, Vol. 19, No. 1.
15. Ten Raa, T. and R. Van Der Ploeg (1989). "A Statistical Approach to the Problem of Negative in Input-Output Analysis", Economic Modelling, No. 6.
16. United Nations (1968). "A System of National Accounts, Studies in Methods", Series F. No.2, Rev.3, New York.
17.______ (2008). "System of National Accounts", New York.
18. Veit, V. Q. (1994). "Practices in Input-Output Table Complication, Regional and Urban Economics", No. 24.
19. Xu, T., Boasheng, Z., Lianyong, F., Masri, M. and A. Honarvar (2011). "Economic Impacts and Challenges of China's Petroleum Industry: An Input-Output Analysis", Energy, No. 36.
20. Stone, R. (1961). Input-Output and National Accounts, Paris, Organization for European Economic Co-Operation.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics