More on multipliers*

Erik Dietzenbacher

Journal of Regional Science, 2005, vol. 45, issue 2, 421-426

Abstract: Abstract. Recently, Oosterhaven and Stelder (2002, Journal of Regional Science, 42, 533–543) (OS) addressed the issue of measuring the economic importance of an industry. In practice, the traditional multipliers are commonly multiplied by, for example, the outputs. According to OS, this is a misuse that leads to double counting, a correction for which results in their net multipliers. In this note, I will provide an economic interpretation, which suggests that net multipliers may be a good choice for descriptive purposes. The comment by de Mesnard (2002, Journal of Regional Science, 42, 545–548) adopts a different viewpoint. Following his approach, I will show that also the common procedure—which was the central point of rejection in OS—has a sound economic interpretation. In its turn, this yields an alternative interpretation for the matrices used in supply‐driven input–output models.

Date: 2005
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (37)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-4146.2005.00377.x

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:jregsc:v:45:y:2005:i:2:p:421-426

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0022-4146

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Regional Science is currently edited by Marlon G. Boarnet, Matthew Kahn and Mark D. Partridge

More articles in Journal of Regional Science from Wiley Blackwell
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().