IMPLAN Employment Accuracy
We recently reviewed a study which claimed IMPLAN employment numbers are inaccurate. I am not sure why anyone would make this claim, since if one knows of an inaccuracy then one changes the model to represent what you know, no problem. But instead they choose not to provide employment information! I have researched this issue with my resources (Miller and Blair),(Harris),(Braat),and (Shaffer) and have found the opposite, that employment follows identical input-output methodology as all other model out-puts. Clearly the model has limitations- but those are understood and adjusted for when one knows and is able to [b]measure [/b]the difference- not likely in most scenarios. Question: could you provide me with peer reviewed sources which discuss the accuracy of IMPLAN employment calculations for my reference library?
Was this post helpful?
-
Hi Scott, A lot of confusion and concern arises when users compare IMPLAN employment figures to the BLS' CEW (also known as ES-202) employment figures. BLS CEW data is not complete coverage of employment. It only covers wage and salary employment covered by UI and federal civilian jobs covered by UCFE. It does not include proprietors, military, elected officials, railroads, religious organizations, small farms, and some private elementary school employment. At IMPLAN, we control to BEA REA datasets and ultimately to the BEA's U.S. NIPA employment, since these data sets attempt to capture all employment. This webpage contains links to number of articles describing our process for developing employment data: http://implan.com/v4/index.php?option=com_multicategories&view=categories&cid=258:employmentdata&Itemid=10 We're not aware of any studies designed specifically to analyze the accuracy of IMPLAN data - please let us know if you come across one. Thanks!0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
1 comment