Table 11 Comparison of value added rates in CEADs MRIO tables, CAS MRIO tables, and SIC MRIO tables for provinces (2012).

From: An interprovincial input–output database distinguishing firm ownership in China from 1997 to 2017

Provinces	42 IO sectors						9 National Account sectors
	To CEADs			To CAS			To CEADs			To CAS
	MAPE	DSIM	AED	MAPE	DSIM	AED	MAPE	DSIM	AED	MAPE	DSIM	AED
Beijing	11.305	0.054	0.035	3.995	0.027	0.002	4.445	0.023	0.002	3.539	0.018	0.010
Tianjin	10.544	0.058	0.023	2.709	0.016	0.000	3.571	0.024	0.009	2.616	0.017	0.001
Hebei	10.825	0.060	0.018	2.122	0.016	0.000	3.446	0.020	0.010	1.457	0.010	0.004
Shanxi	10.260	0.058	0.025	1.439	0.010	0.002	3.496	0.021	0.000	1.407	0.009	0.000
Inner Mongolia	9.218	0.053	0.003	2.571	0.016	0.004	2.889	0.016	0.002	2.882	0.019	0.007
Liaoning	10.110	0.059	0.027	2.613	0.020	0.002	3.316	0.020	0.009	1.892	0.012	0.003
Jilin	11.892	0.067	0.016	3.974	0.022	0.004	5.066	0.032	0.014	3.185	0.020	0.007
Heilongjiang	9.494	0.052	0.023	1.733	0.012	0.002	2.857	0.016	0.005	2.151	0.014	0.002
Shanghai	10.029	0.055	0.018	3.035	0.018	0.002	3.097	0.020	0.007	2.924	0.018	0.005
Jiangsu	9.118	0.051	0.025	2.056	0.014	0.005	3.665	0.019	0.006	2.258	0.013	0.002
Zhejiang	9.414	0.055	0.015	2.642	0.018	0.001	3.502	0.021	0.007	1.907	0.011	0.002
Anhui	10.479	0.059	0.025	3.646	0.023	0.002	3.605	0.021	0.010	2.399	0.014	0.001
Fujian	10.189	0.059	0.018	2.151	0.014	0.004	3.355	0.021	0.010	1.526	0.010	0.003
Jiangxi	9.554	0.054	0.019	2.275	0.015	0.002	2.939	0.017	0.003	2.117	0.012	0.000
Shandong	10.574	0.065	0.011	2.383	0.020	0.001	3.352	0.019	0.005	1.152	0.007	0.000
Henan	10.847	0.064	0.010	3.264	0.022	0.003	3.590	0.022	0.011	2.431	0.016	0.003
Hubei	11.988	0.060	0.026	1.968	0.012	0.000	4.121	0.027	0.013	1.937	0.013	0.006
Hunan	11.877	0.060	0.023	2.243	0.014	0.003	3.869	0.023	0.010	1.865	0.013	0.005
Guangdong	10.626	0.061	0.014	2.191	0.015	0.003	3.988	0.024	0.011	2.007	0.012	0.004
Guangxi	11.124	0.058	0.027	1.850	0.013	0.002	2.758	0.015	0.006	1.333	0.009	0.001
Hainan	8.896	0.050	0.027	1.553	0.010	0.003	2.628	0.015	0.004	1.815	0.010	0.001
Chongqing	10.025	0.059	0.021	2.027	0.013	0.002	3.461	0.022	0.011	1.868	0.013	0.004
Sichuan	10.482	0.059	0.034	2.205	0.014	0.004	3.409	0.020	0.009	1.642	0.011	0.004
Guizhou	10.108	0.057	0.019	1.545	0.009	0.005	2.877	0.017	0.008	2.082	0.014	0.005
Yunnan	8.927	0.052	0.026	1.339	0.007	0.003	3.042	0.016	0.006	1.645	0.009	0.001
Tibet	9.708	0.053	0.025	1.910	0.025	0.020	3.022	0.017	0.002	1.262	0.006	0.001
Shaanxi	11.410	0.061	0.031	3.285	0.020	0.003	3.091	0.016	0.006	2.041	0.012	0.002
Gansu	9.978	0.055	0.011	2.414	0.016	0.001	3.170	0.017	0.002	2.524	0.014	0.000
Qinghai	11.435	0.061	0.025	1.778	0.012	0.005	4.513	0.022	0.005	2.783	0.015	0.005
Ningxia	10.986	0.056	0.014	2.272	0.018	0.001	2.853	0.016	0.005	1.868	0.012	0.001
Xinjiang	10.227	0.060	0.019	2.028	0.013	0.005	3.833	0.023	0.010	1.793	0.013	0.006

Numbers in bold indicate lower levels of similarity (MAPE≥15; DSIM≥0.1; AED≥0.1).

Back to article page

Table 11 Comparison of value added rates in CEADs MRIO tables, CAS MRIO tables, and SIC MRIO tables for provinces (2012).

Search

Quick links