LPP?

Comments

3 comments

  • Avatar
    IMPLAN Support
    Hi Ruth, As long as the jobs estimate are onsite at the workplace you will want to leave the Local Purchase Percentage at 100%. The LPP is not an estimate for Indirect or Induced, but merely indicated how much of the Direct Effect is local to the region. The Model will use local RPC's for calculating Indirect and Induced impacts. If you have estimations about how purchasing will shift we can certainly help you to try to incorporate that information into the Model, but IMPLAN is a static Model (thus provides a static picture of the economy for the year of the data) so it won't be able to make estimates as to those changes. Alternatively if you have key commodities in mind that might shift we and a thought as to how they might shift, we could see if we could help you to set up several variant models of the impact. Please let me know if this addresses your concern or if you have any additional questions.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    sergenra
    Thank you for your help. This really clears this question up for me. I have a new question for the same project. I ran my analysis for the state (MO) using 2010 data. Now I need to look at a 16 county bi-state region and I have 2011 data for these counties. The industry has negative proprietor income in 2011. I also have 2008 county data for the counties and proprietor income is positive in the region in 2008. My question is what would be the best way to adjust proprietor income while using the 2011 data? I would prefer not to 0 it out. Could I use the 2008 per capita level for the same 16 counties or the 2010 per capita state number? Which would be a better choice? (The project and a large share of the region's economic activity is in the MO side of the bi-state region). Also, am I correct that the best way to make this adjustment is in the events screen, not change the model? Thanks again.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    IMPLAN Support
    Hi Ruth, Glad to help! If you have the same counties for 2008 you could certainly use that as a proxy if you don't want to zero out the Proprietor Income field, you will just want to be sure that you adjust the 2008 dollar value, outside the model, with the appropriate Sectors deflation adjustment so that you Proprietor Income will be reflecting a 2011 value (for this we would recommend pulling the deflator from the 2011 model for the 2008 Event Year and then multiply it by the 2008 values (this is because the historic deflators are based on recorded data, whereas the future deflators are projections, thus looking 'back' at 2008 from the 2011 model will provide a more accurate deflation.))Actually though the choice is up to you as it is not necessarily a clear answer. The down side to using ratios from 2008 is using older data but the upside is that it is the same Study Area, while using ratios from 2010 would be using more recent data but for a state average. If you also have the state-level data for 2008, then it might be a good idea to look at the PI per Output for the county 2008 vs. the state 2008, and if they are very different or of opposite sign, you are probably better off sticking with the older county than the newer state. In either case we would not recommend using PI per-capita, since PI in a particular industry is not likely tied very closely to a region's population. I would suggest PI per Output for that industry. We typically recommend adjusting the Event rather than Customizing the region, as this affects only the Direct Effects, and lets the remaining rounds of purchases reflect the underlying IMPLAN relationships. But in this specific case, it sounds like you want to change the entire industry, not just the Direct Effect, to no longer reflect negative Proprietor Income. If this is the case, this would be one instance where Customizing the regional data would be preferred. In regards to your state 2010 verses county 2011 just remember that because these Models represent two different snap-shots of the economy if you are trying to approximate relationships between the county level and state level analysis, there will be many more things at play (including different multiplier relationships) than just the increased land area (and thus increased internalization of local purchases). Please let us know if you have any additional questions.
    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.