RAPID ANALYSIS OF INTERSECTORAL RELATIONS OF THE JAPANESE ECONOMY: AGGREGATION, ASSESSMENT, QUALITATIVE CHARACTERISTICS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15407/economyukr.2025.04.007Keywords:
intersectoral balance; input-output table; Leontief model; output; GDP; analysis of intersectoral relations; modeling; Japanese economy; classification of economic activitiesAbstract
The processes of social reproduction of the Japanese economy in 2020 are described. Their information and logical connection with the aggregated input-output table is studied. The input-output table of the Japanese economy for 2020 (108 aggregated products) is aggregated to the level of three sectors: primary, secondary, and tertiary (respectively, the agricultural sector, industry, and the service sector). Based on the aggregated model, its qualitative characteristics are studied, and a forecast of intersectoral relations is made according to the input-output scheme.
The analysis and modeling of intersectoral relations is carried out based on the primary input-output table of the Japanese economy for 2020 (108 aggregated products), the main results of the study according to the original and aggregated input-output tables are given. Aggregated and expanded data form the basis for rapid analysis of economic structure, determination of its structural features, qualitative characteristics of the production system, etc.
A qualitative analysis of the sectoral structure of the economy has been carried out. It includes determination of gross value added coefficients, Brauer—Solow coefficients and imports, impact and response coefficients, output structure, GDP, investments, exports. The study emphasizes the need to ensure the technological intensity of conducting the entire complex of intersectoral studies, which will allow to carry out similar studies for different time periods, degrees of data aggregation, and economic systems. This approach makes it possible to conduct comparative studies that involve identifying qualitative changes, trends in the transformation of economic infrastructure, etc.
It is proposed to carry out a similar system analysis and modeling of intersectoral relations of the Ukrainian economy according to a detailed and aggregated sectoral classification of economic activities. This will make it possible to analyze and model economic changes based on final consumer spending, which will be determined by the processes of post-war recovery.
References
Kuboniwa, М. (Ed.) (1984). Economics using microcomputers. Tokyo, Aoki Shoten [in Japanese].
Remond-Tiedrez, I., Rueda-Cantuche, J. (Eds.) (2019). EU inter-country supply, use and input-output tables — Full international and global accounts for research in input-output analysis (FIGARO). URL: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/3888793/10109187/KS-TC-19-002-EN-N.pdf
Leontief, W. (1936). Quantitative Input and Output Relations in the Economic System of the United States. Review of Economics and Statistics. Vol. 18, No. 3. P. 105-125. https://doi.org/10.2307/1927837
Leontief, W. (1986). Input-Output Economics. Oxford, Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95121-5_1072-1
Leontief, W. (1977). Essays in Economics: Theories, facts, and policies. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Stone, R. (1961). Input-Output and National Accounts. Paris, OEEC.
Glushkov, V. (1975). Macroeconomic models and principles of construction of Nationwide Automated System. M. 160 p. [in Russian].
Glushkov, V. (1980). DISPLAN – new planning technology. Control Systems and Machines. No. 6. P. 5-10 [in Russian].
Arkhangelskiy, Yu., Kovalenko, I. (1988). Intersectoral balance. Kyiv. 248 p. [in Russian].
Arkhanhelskyi, Yu., Kovalenko, I. (1998). Fundamentals of modeling intersectoral relations. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
Sergienko, I., Mikhalevich, M., Stetsyuk, P. et al. (1998). Interindustry model of planned technological-structural changes. Cybernetics and Systems Analysis. Vol. 34. P. 319-330. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02666973
Lyashenko, I. (1999). Economic and mathematical methods and models of sustainable development. Kyiv. 236 p. [in Ukrainian].
Skrypnychenko, M. (2004). Sectoral and intercountry models of economic development. Kyiv. 256 p. [in Ukrainian].
Yastremskii, O. (2018). Key and effective economic activities of Ukraine. Herald of the Economic Sciences of Ukraine. No. 2. P. 177-182. URL: http://www.venu-journal.org/download/2018/2/31-Iastremskyi.pdf [in Ukrainian].
Yastremskii, O. (2020). Input–Output Productivity Cost Analysis of the Economy of Ukraine: Selected Cross-Countries and Intertemporal Comparison. Cybernetics and Systems Analysis. Vol. 56. P. 591–602. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10559-020-00276-z
Matveyev, M., Arkhangelskiy, Yu., Rybalchenko, V. et al. (1988). Models of the automated system for plan calculations of the State Planning Committee of the Republic. Kyiv. 239 p. [in Russian].
Yastremskii, O. (2019). Interbranch Chessboard of Uncertainty and Its Applications: Forecasting, Economic Policy, Fiscal Risk, General Equilibrium. Cybernetics and Systems Analysis. Vol. 55. P. 369-376. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10559-019-00143-6
Kulyk, V. (2021). Japan experience: system analysis and modelling inter-industry relations. Finance of Ukraine. No. 1. P. 83-102. https://doi.org/10.33763/finukr2021.01.083 [in Ukrainian].
Kulyk, V. (2022). The input-output scheme of the economy of Japan: System analysis and modelling of the inter-branch relations of the Ukraine’s economy. Finance of Ukraine. No. 3. P. 53-75. https://doi.org/10.33763/finukr2022.03.053 [in Ukrainian].
Kulyk, V. (2020). Analysis of Japan’s and Ukraine’s sectoral structure of the economy within the framework of the aggregated input-output models. RFI Scientific Papers. No. 3. P. 109-127. https://doi.org/10.33763/npndfi2020.03.109 [in Ukrainian].
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Publisher PH "Academperiodyka" of the NAS of Ukraine
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
