Refine
Year of publication
- 2021 (3) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (2)
- Part of a Book (1)
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Keywords
- Diversification (1)
- Euro method (2)
- GRAS method (2)
- National Accounts (1)
- Non-survey techniques (2)
- Sustainable development (1)
- Updating supply and use tables (2)
Institute
The main objective of this paper is to revisit the Euro method in a critical and constructive way.Wehave analysed some arguments against the Euro method published recently in the literature as well as some other relevant aspects of the SUT-Euro and SUT-RAS methods not covered before. Although not being the Euro method perfect, we believe that there is still space for the use of the Euro method in updating/regionalizing Supply and Use tables.
For decades now, exports and import have grown more rapidly than domestic production. This is a strong indication that, besides the rapid growth of foreign trade in final goods, trade in intermediates is becoming increasingly important. For this reason, an input-output ap-proach is more appropriate for any analysis of diversification than a traditional approach based purely on macroeconomic data.
This article analyses economic diversification in Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries using data from input-output tables which are an integral part of the national accounts. We compare the performance of the GCC economies with that of a reference case, Norway, which is considered to have successfully diversified its economy despite having a large oil resource base. It also assesses these countries’ relative progress on sustainable development using a measure of the World Bank, adjusted net savings, which evaluates the true rate of savings in an economy after accounting for investments in physical and human capital, de-pletion of natural resources, and damage from environmental pollution.
The article concludes that GCC countries have, contrary to expectation, collectively per-formed relatively well on diversification, but their performance on sustainable development varies.
The main objective of this paper is to revisit Temursho’s (2020) article “On the Euro method” in a critical and constructive way. We have praised part of his work and at the same time, we have analysed some of his arguments against the Euro method and against the work published by Valderas-Jaramillo et al. (2019). Moreover, we have analysed some other relevant aspects of the SUT-Euro and SUT-RAS methods not covered in Temursho (2020). Temursho (2020) seems to conclude that no one should use the Euro method again because of its limitations and drawbacks. However, although not being the Euro method perfect, we are afraid that there is still space for the use of the Euro method in updating/regionalizing supply and use tables.