Indirect Output Greater for Subset than Whole Set

Hi Alex. This does not happen frequently, but it is possible under a number of conditions. The more common ones are: 1. The Advertising and related services RPCs computed for the county model might be smaller than at the zip-code level. This is quite possible for sectors that are more concentrated at a zip-code level than for the county as a whole. RPCs of the direct effects are not the problem. It is the RPCs of the strongly-linked backward linkages (first round indirect) that cause this problem. Different RPCs are especially likely in your case if you are using the tradeflow RPC method in the county model and the econometric RPC method in the zip-code model. You will want to have both Models built with the same multiplier estimation method (economic Regional Purchasing Coefficient). You can set this for your county model by going into File>User Preferences>Social Accounts Tab and setting the radio button to econometric Regional Purchasing Coefficient. For that model. It will ask you if you want to reconstruct the Model, and you will want to do this in order to make the comparison. In addition to this... 2. The zip-code area Advertising and related services sector may have higher Intermediate Expenditures per Output or higher Employee Compensation per Output, etc. When you use the county model, you are essentially impacting a different sector, since it is in effect an "average" of all the zip-codes in that county. In this case, you will want to edit the Study Area Data in the county model so that the main sectors involved look like the zip-code level sectors (i.e., same Intermediate Expenditures per Output, Labor Income per Output, etc.). These edits can be made by going to Customize > Study Area Data. After you make any edits, you will need to click "Save" and then reconstruct the multipliers (Options > Construct > Multipliers). Hopefully this will help to explain the differences that you are seeing. Please let us know if you have any additional questions.