Balance issues in monetary input-output tables

S. Merciai, R. Heijungs

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Input-output tables (IOTs) are widely used in several types of analyses. Although born in an economic context, IOTs are increasingly used for the environmental impact assessment of product systems, e.g. in environmental policy analysis, and for several others such as the accounting of greenhouse gases.However, the use in these contexts does not ensure the validity of the IOT as a consistent and robust multidisciplinary modeling tool in itself. It is in respect to certain basic requirements that IOTs should find their legitimacy. In this paper, we study their validity with respect to a well-established scientific law: the mass balance. Compliance with this basic balance is an important check for data consistency.Following such a track, we focus specifically on monetary input-output tables and we reach the conclusion that IOTs can fail in respecting the basic balance laws whenever prices differ per purchaser. Therefore caution is needed because the estimations in terms of environmental pressures can be biased. The drawback lays in the use of homogeneous prices, which determines a discrepancy in physical units between what is used and what is asked for, within and between activities. © 2014 Elsevier B.V.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)69-74
JournalEcological Economics
Volume102
Issue numberJune
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Fingerprint

policy analysis
environmental impact assessment
environmental policy
compliance
mass balance
greenhouse gas
economics
modeling
price
Input-output table
product

Cite this

Merciai, S. ; Heijungs, R. / Balance issues in monetary input-output tables. In: Ecological Economics. 2014 ; Vol. 102, No. June. pp. 69-74.
@article{dda952aec3c84c83b24baa168c20678a,
title = "Balance issues in monetary input-output tables",
abstract = "Input-output tables (IOTs) are widely used in several types of analyses. Although born in an economic context, IOTs are increasingly used for the environmental impact assessment of product systems, e.g. in environmental policy analysis, and for several others such as the accounting of greenhouse gases.However, the use in these contexts does not ensure the validity of the IOT as a consistent and robust multidisciplinary modeling tool in itself. It is in respect to certain basic requirements that IOTs should find their legitimacy. In this paper, we study their validity with respect to a well-established scientific law: the mass balance. Compliance with this basic balance is an important check for data consistency.Following such a track, we focus specifically on monetary input-output tables and we reach the conclusion that IOTs can fail in respecting the basic balance laws whenever prices differ per purchaser. Therefore caution is needed because the estimations in terms of environmental pressures can be biased. The drawback lays in the use of homogeneous prices, which determines a discrepancy in physical units between what is used and what is asked for, within and between activities. {\circledC} 2014 Elsevier B.V.",
author = "S. Merciai and R. Heijungs",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.03.016",
language = "English",
volume = "102",
pages = "69--74",
journal = "Ecological Economics",
issn = "0921-8009",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "June",

}

Balance issues in monetary input-output tables. / Merciai, S.; Heijungs, R.

In: Ecological Economics, Vol. 102, No. June, 2014, p. 69-74.

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Balance issues in monetary input-output tables

AU - Merciai, S.

AU - Heijungs, R.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Input-output tables (IOTs) are widely used in several types of analyses. Although born in an economic context, IOTs are increasingly used for the environmental impact assessment of product systems, e.g. in environmental policy analysis, and for several others such as the accounting of greenhouse gases.However, the use in these contexts does not ensure the validity of the IOT as a consistent and robust multidisciplinary modeling tool in itself. It is in respect to certain basic requirements that IOTs should find their legitimacy. In this paper, we study their validity with respect to a well-established scientific law: the mass balance. Compliance with this basic balance is an important check for data consistency.Following such a track, we focus specifically on monetary input-output tables and we reach the conclusion that IOTs can fail in respecting the basic balance laws whenever prices differ per purchaser. Therefore caution is needed because the estimations in terms of environmental pressures can be biased. The drawback lays in the use of homogeneous prices, which determines a discrepancy in physical units between what is used and what is asked for, within and between activities. © 2014 Elsevier B.V.

AB - Input-output tables (IOTs) are widely used in several types of analyses. Although born in an economic context, IOTs are increasingly used for the environmental impact assessment of product systems, e.g. in environmental policy analysis, and for several others such as the accounting of greenhouse gases.However, the use in these contexts does not ensure the validity of the IOT as a consistent and robust multidisciplinary modeling tool in itself. It is in respect to certain basic requirements that IOTs should find their legitimacy. In this paper, we study their validity with respect to a well-established scientific law: the mass balance. Compliance with this basic balance is an important check for data consistency.Following such a track, we focus specifically on monetary input-output tables and we reach the conclusion that IOTs can fail in respecting the basic balance laws whenever prices differ per purchaser. Therefore caution is needed because the estimations in terms of environmental pressures can be biased. The drawback lays in the use of homogeneous prices, which determines a discrepancy in physical units between what is used and what is asked for, within and between activities. © 2014 Elsevier B.V.

U2 - 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.03.016

DO - 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.03.016

M3 - Article

VL - 102

SP - 69

EP - 74

JO - Ecological Economics

JF - Ecological Economics

SN - 0921-8009

IS - June

ER -