Contribution Analysis of the Maple Industry

Comments

7 comments

  • Avatar
    IMPLAN Support
    Thank you for your post! I am wondering, when you pulled the SAM Multiplier was it the Detail SAM Multiplier or the Summary? Also, would you be able to supply us with additional information so that we can duplicate your study. What was the total value of the Maple sector and what region are you building your model on? As a note, did you remember to subtract your Output from sector 10, the output that was going into the Maple sector. Thanks!
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    fbecot@uvm.edu
    Hello, Thank you very much for your response. I pulled the SAM multiplier from: explore -> multipliers -> detail multiplier. I am building the model using the Vermont state data from 2011. The total value of the maple sector is $71,895,508, employment is 2,649.5 and employee compensation is $18,029,289. When doing the contribution analysis I also made sure that the year of analysis was set at the same year that the data is from. I will email my model to the support email address as I get an error message when I attach it to the post. I ended up aggregating most of the ag sector since the data I collected was not detailed enough for keeping it disaggregated but I did remove what I added in the new sector from the old sector. Thanks so much, Florence
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    IMPLAN Support
    Hi Florence, We appreciate you sending us the model. Due to many manipulations to the model, we are not able to dissect where the error is occurring. In addition when we look at total GRP between an unaltered model and your model; your model is showing GRP as $28.9B and in our model $26.9B. This would tend to indicate that the Maple industry has some double counting with sector 10. However this could also have some contribution from the aggregation that you did. Unfortunately as stated above, we can't see exactly what you did because of aggregation. As regards the analysis results; with the event year of 2011 and dollar year for View of 2011, we see that the numbers are matching what you put into your Study Area Data for the Maple Sector. The Labor Income Value is the combined value of Proprietor Income and Employment Compensation and it looks as if Proprietor Income is contribution $18MM, could this be the source, of your concern? Would you be able to supply us with additional information so that we can further assist?
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    IMPLAN Support
    In addition when we look at total GRP between an unaltered model and your model; your model is showing GRP as $28.9B and in our model $26.9B. This would tend to indicate that the Maple industry has some double counting with sector 10. However this could also have some contribution from the aggregation that you did. Unfortunately as stated above, we can't confirm that no issues arose from the segregation of the maple Sector because the aggregation forced a loss of Sector 10's identity. As regards the analysis results; with the event year of 2011 and dollar year for View of 2011, we see that the numbers are matching what you put into your Study Area Data for the Maple Sector. The Labor Income Value is the combined value of Proprietor Income and Employment Compensation and it looks as if Proprietor Income is contribution $18MM, could this be the source, of your concern? Would you be able to supply us with additional information so that we can further assist? On your second question, if there are feedback linkages between the ag Sector analysis, you may want to consider doing a multi-industry contribution analysis. We choose an ag Sector at random and followed the methodology and it looks spot on give or take a little for rounding. Here is the Study Area Data Industry Code Description Employment Output Employee Compensation Proprietor Income 6 Greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture production 254.7 $26,565,929 $11,242,949 $27,517,056 So based on the formula: Output $26,565,929.000000* Detail Multiplier 1.012308 Reciprocal 0.987842 Industry Sales $26,242,931.005188 We rounded the Industry Sales to $26,242,931.01* And Detail Results* for Sector 6 were: Sector Description Direct Indirect Induced Total 6 Greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture production 251.6 3.1 0.0 254.7 Sector Description Direct Indirect Induced Total 6 Greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture production $11,106,024 $134,850 $1,848 $11,242,722 Sector Description Direct Indirect Induced Total 6 Greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture production $26,242,391 $318,637 $4,366 $26,565,393 So you can see the variance on Employment Compensation is $227 a .0002% difference which is expected by rounding. So we aren't able to duplicate the effects you are seeing in your Model.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    fbecot@uvm.edu
    Hello, Thank you very much for your response. I created a new model and did not make any changes and find that the GRP is $28.9B which is the same GRP than for the customized model. I am not sure what the implications are since the GRP in your model is $26.9B. I have to admit that the cause of my problem is due a mistake of my own. I realized that he employee compensation and the proprietor income were not entered properly and when I was double checking the results with the initial numbers things did not match up. My bad. I have since fixed the study area and the numbers seems closer to where they should be. The employee compensation is $8.1 million and proprietor income is $2.8 million. The labor income of the direct effect is $11,5 million. Is the difference of $0.6 million considered acceptable or should they exactly match? As far as following the multi-industry contribution methods. Is the primary reason to follow this method instead of the single industry method to make sure that the primary commodity is at 100% and it does not matter that I am only looking at 1 industry? For the next step of the study, I was actually planning on following the multi-industry contribution method as I want to add the contribution of other actors in the maple industry such as maple equipment manufacturers as well as packers (which have two functions: food manufacturing and wholesaling). Thanks, Florence
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    IMPLAN Support
    Hi Florence, Thank you for the additional information. I recommend that if you are looking to do our analysis on a Single Industry, that you just use the Single Industry Contribution Analysis method. In this method you are essentially constraining the model to only look at the Contribution of your single sector. The Multi Industry Contribution Analysis method is useful when you need to constrain the buy back linkages for all Directly Impacted Industries. The Employee Comp. and your Proprietor Income values should equal your Direct Labor Income value. The difference between your two values $.6MM and $11.5MM is a 5% difference; which is significant. When viewing your Scenario Results, did you select the correct Dollar Year for View? In regards to the two different GRP values; we are looking into why there are differences and will reach back out to you with the answer. THanks!
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    IMPLAN Support
    Hi Florence, Would you mind sending in your new Model, without the sectors aggregated. We are interested in comparing your unedited model build with ours. Thanks!
    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.