6533b874fe1ef96bd12d6259
RESEARCH PRODUCT
Biproportion et offre dominante (A propos de l'article d'André Torre ‘Sur la signification théorique du modèle d'offre multisectoriel')
Louis De Mesnardsubject
JEL : C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods/C.C6 - Mathematical Methods • Programming Models • Mathematical and Simulation Modeling/C.C6.C67 - Input–Output ModelsSupply-drivenJEL: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods/C.C6 - Mathematical Methods • Programming Models • Mathematical and Simulation Modeling/C.C6.C67 - Input–Output ModelsOffre dominanteInput-outputJEL : D - Microeconomics/D.D5 - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium/D.D5.D57 - Input–Output Tables and Analysis[ SHS.ECO ] Humanities and Social Sciences/Economies and financesLeontiefJEL: D - Microeconomics/D.D5 - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium/D.D5.D57 - Input–Output Tables and Analysis[SHS.ECO] Humanities and Social Sciences/Economics and Finance[SHS.ECO]Humanities and Social Sciences/Economics and FinanceGeneral Economics Econometrics and FinanceGhoshdescription
One replies here to partisans of the reject of the supply-driven model in input-output analysis and especially to A. Torre (Revue Economique, 5, 44, 951-970). First of all, demand-driven hypothesis (Leontief) and supply-driven hypothesis (Ghosh) are symmetrical and incompatible, what forbidden to reject the second to the motive that it depends on the first. Secondly, the results earlier obtained for France of 1970 to 1985 from the method of the biproportionnal filter show that there is so much instability in the long term in the columns than in the rows of the flow matrix. Thirdly, the assimilation of the usage of allocation coefficients to the adoption of the supply-side model is excessive.
| year | journal | country | edition | language |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1996-01-01 |