Assessment of the Efficiency of FLQ and AFLQ Methods in the Regionalization of National Input-Output Tables in Iran’s Economy

Document Type : Research Paper


1 Ph.D. Candidate in Economics, Faculty of Economics, University of Mazandaran

2 Associate Professor of Economics, University of Mazandaran


This article seeks to compare the accuracy of the Flegg’s Location Quotients (FLQ) and Augmented Flegg’s Location Quotient (AFLQ) methods in the regionalization of the national input-output table. The study of the evolution of location quotient approaches shows that although all the empirical evidence confirms the superiority of Flegg’s location quotient and its augmented methods in comparison to location quotient approaches, there is no single theory about the success of these two methods compared to each other. Therefore, the input-output table is provided for 31 provinces of the country, using the value added and output statistics of the provinces, updated national input-output table provided by Statistical Center of Iran in 2011, and the FLQ and AFLQ methods. To compare the performance of the FLQ method with the AFLQ method, five statistical indicators of estimating deviation are used. The results of the research show that in the regionalization of the national input-output table in Iran’s economy, the FLQ method is more accurate than the AFLQ in many statistical indicators, especially Tiel’s index.


Main Subjects

  1. Banouei, A. (2012). Evaluation of the different treatments and methods of separating imports with emphasis on 1381 IOT of Iran. The Journal of Economic Policy, 4(8), 31-74 (In Persian).
  2. Banouei, A., & Bazzazan, F. (2006). The importance of spatial economic dimensions in construction of regional input-output table: Neglected phenomena in Iran. Iranian Journal of Economic Research, 8(27), 89-114 (In Persian).
  3. Banouei, A., Bazzazan, F., & Karami, M. (2007a). Relationship between spatial economic dimensions and input-output coefficients in Iranian provinces. Iranian Journal of Economic Research,  8(29), 143-170 (In Persian).
  4. Banouei, A., Bazzazan, F., & Karami, M. (2007b). The modern location quotient function, spatial dimension, and regional input-output coefficients: The case of Tehran province. Iranian Journal of Economic Research, 9(31), 27-53 (In Persian).
  5.   Bonfiglio, A., & Chelli, F. (2008). Assessing the behaviour of non-survey methods for constructing regional input-output tables through a Monte Carlo simulation. Economic Systems Research, 20(3), 243-258.
  6. Flegg, A. T., & Webber, C. D. (2000). Regional size, regional specialization and the FLQ formula. Regional Studies, 34, 563-569.
  7. Flegg, A. T., & Tohmo, T. (2013). Regional input–output tables and the FLQ formula: A case study of Finland. Regional Studies, 47(5), 703-721.
  8. Flegg, A. T., & Tohmo, T. (2016).Estimating regional input coefficients and multipliers: The use of the FLQ is not a gamble. Regional Studies, 50(2), 310-325.
  9. Flegg, A. T., & Webber, C. D. (1997). On the appropriate use of location quotients in generating regional input‐output tables: Reply. Regional studies, 31(8), 795-805.
  10. Flegg, A. T., Mastronardi, L. J., & Romero, C. A. (2016). Evaluating the FLQ and AFLQ formulae for estimating regional input coefficients: Empirical evidence for the province of Cordoba, Argentina. Economic Systems Research, 28(1), 21-37.
  11. Flegg, A. T., Webber, C. D., & Elliott, M. V. (1995). On the appropriate use of location quotients in generating regional input–output tables. Regional Studies, 29(6), 547-561.
  12. Ghosh, A. (1958). Input-output approach in an allocation system. Economica, 25, 58–64.
  13. Harris, R. I., & Liu, A. (1998). Input‐Output modelling of the urban and regional economy: The importance of external trade, Regional Studies, 32(9), 851-862.
  14. Klijs, J., Peerlings, J., Steijaert, T., & Heijman, W. (2016). Regionalising input-output tables: Comparison of four location quotient methods, in impact assessment in tourism economics. Springer International Publishing, 43-65.
  15. Kowalewski, J. (2015). Regionalization of national input-output tables: Empirical evidence on the use of the FLQ formula. Regional Studies,49(2), 240-250.
  16. Kronenberg, T. (2009). Construction of regional input-output tables using nonsurvey methods: The Role of cross-hauling. International Regional Science Review, 32(1), 40-64.
  17. Lihtonen, O., & Tykkylainen, M. (2014). Estimating regional input coefficients and multipliers: Is the choice of a non-survey technique a gamble?. Regional Studies, 48 (2), 382-399.
  18. McCann, P., & Dewhurst, J. H. (1998). Regional size, industrial location and input-output expenditure coefficient. Regional Studies, 32(5), 435-444.
  19. Miller, R. E., & Lahr, M. L. (2001). A taxonomy of extractions. Contributions to Economic Analysis249, 407-441.
  20. Miller, R. E., & Blair, P. D. (2009). Input-output analysis: foundations and extensions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  21. Morrison, W., & Smith, P. (1974). Nonsurvey input-output techniques at the small area level: an Evaluation. Journal of Regional Science, 14, 1-14.
  22. Nasrollahi, Z., & Zarei, M. (2017). Introduction and evaluation of industry-specific FLQ method to regionalization of national input-output tables: A Case study of Yazd province in 2011. Journal of Economy and Regional Development, 24 (13), 112-140 (In Persian).
  23. Polenske, K. R. (1995). Leontief’s spatial economic analysis. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 6, 309-318.
  24. Richardson, H. W. (1985). Input-output and economic base multipliers: Looking backward and forward. Journal of Regional Science, 25, 607-661.
  25. Round, J. I. (1978a). On estimating trade flows in interregional input-output models. Journal of Regional Science and Urban Economics, 8, 284-302.
  26. Round, J. I. (1978b). An interregional input‐output approach to the evaluation of non-survey methods. Journal of Regional Science, 18(2), 179-194.
  27. Round, J. I. (1983). Non-survey techniques: A critical review of the theory and evidence. International Regional Science Review, 8(3), 189-212.
  28. Schaffer, W., & Chu, K. (1969). Nonservey techniques for constructing regional interindustry models. Paper and Proceeding of the Regional Science Association, 23, 83-101.
  29. Sengupta, A. (1987). Input-output allocation model for India: A note. anvesak, 7(2), 103-107.
  30. Tamesue, K., & Tsutsumi, M. (2014). Assessing the estimation accuracy of LQ methods for regionalization of input coefficients: A case study in Japan, 22nd International Input-Output Conference & 4th Edition of the International School of I-O Analysis, Lisbon, Portugal.
  31. Tohmo, T. (2004). New development in the use of location quotients to estimate regional input-output coefficients and multipliers. Regional Studies, 38, 43-54.