Content uploaded by Theodore Mariolis
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Theodore Mariolis on Feb 15, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
*Depart ment of Publ ic Adminis tr ation, Panteion University, Athens , Greece; E-mail:
eirinileriou@panteion.gr
** Corresponding author. Depa rtment of Public Administration, Panteion University, Athens,
Greece; E-mail: mariolis@hotmail.gr
*** Research Institute for Tourism, Athens, Greece, and School of Applied Mathematical and
Physical Sciences, National Technical University of Athens, Greece; E-mail: gsok@hotmail.gr
BULLETIN OF POLITICAL ECONOMY
10:2 (2016): 137-159
An Intersectoral Analysis of the Greek Economy:
Evidence from the Symmetric Input-Output
Tables for the years 2005 and 2010
EIRINI LERIOU,* THEODORE MARIOLIS** & GEORGE SOKLIS***
Using input-output table data and a system of basic and derivatives indices,
this paper provides an intersectoral analysis of the Greek economy for the
years 2005 and 2010. The findings suggest that, due to profound structural
imbalances, (i) a well-targeted effective demand management policy could
be mainly based on the service and primary production sectors; while (ii)
industrial policy would be necessary and could primarily focus on nine highly
import-dependent commodities of the industry sector.
INTRODUCTION
During the period 2008-2010, the Greek economy faced serious external
and fiscal imbalances. In 2010, the unemployment rate was at 12.7%, the
government budget and current account deficits, amounted to 11.1% and
10.1% of GDP, respectively, while the trade balance deficit was 6.8%
(according to Bank of Greece data). The public debt reached 146% of
GDP, the ‘net international investment position’ was at minus 97.9% and,
finally, the net national savings were minus 24 billion euro or 13% of the
net national disposable income (according to Hellenic Statistical Authority
data).1
The Greek governments attempted to correct those imbalances by the
application of contractionary fiscal and internal devaluation policies, such
as indiscriminate reductions in government expenditures, increases in taxes
and cuts in unit labour costs. These policies resulted to a significant
138 / EIRINI LERIOU, THEODORE MARIOLIS & GEORGE SOKLIS
improvement of the state budget primary deficit but with a GDP contraction
(for the period 2010-2013) of about 22.2% (in constant prices of 2010)
and a rate of unemployment of about 27.5%. In the same period, the exports
were reduced by 3.3% and the imports by 15.5% (in constant prices of
2010), while the export market share of world’s total was reduced by 9.4%
(according to Hellenic Statistical Authority and World Bank data).
The objective of this paper is to analyze the intersectoral structure of
the Greek economy and thus to provide a context for formulating possible
alternative economic policy programmes. For this purpose, we use:
(i). Data from the Symmetric Input-Output Tables (SIOTs) of the Greek
economy for the years 2005 and 2010;2 and
(ii). A system of basic and derivative indices associated with the
constituent components of gross national expenditure and the
external sector of the economy, respectively (Mariolis, 2017b).
The remainder of the paper is structured as follows. Section 2 gives
the system of indices. Section 3 presents and evaluates the main empirical
results. Finally, Section 4 concludes.
THE SYSTEM OF INDICES
For each produced commodity i (= 1, 2, ..., n) it holds true that
Xi = ICi + Ci + Ii + EXi – IMi(1)
where Xi denotes the gross domestic production, ICi the intermediate
consumption (domestic and imported), Ci the total final consumption
expenditure (by households and government), Ii the gross capital formation
(gross fixed capital formation and changes in inventories), EXi the exports,
and IMi the imports of commodity i. The sum ICi + Ci + Ii denotes the gross
national expenditure for commodity i, while Xi – ICi denotes the gross
value added of commodity i.
Dividing equation (1) by Xi we obtain
1
ICi Ci Ii EXi IMi
(2)
where
/
ICi i i
IC X
,
/
Ci i i
C X
,
/
Ii i i
I X
,
/
EXi i i
EX X
, and
/
IMi i i
IM X
. When
1
ICi
, the gross value added of commodity
i
is
negative.
Now, we can introduce the following derivative indices:
(i). Index of gross domestic savings: For each produced commodity
we may write
AN INTERSECTORAL ANALYSIS OF THE GREEK ECONOMY... / 139
i i i i
S I EX IM
(3)
where Si denotes the gross domestic savings in commodity i. Dividing
equation (3) by Xi we obtain
Si Ii EXi IMi
(4)
or, invoking equation (2),
1 ( )
Si ICi Ci
where
/
Si i i
S X
denotes the index of gross domestic sa vings in
commodity
i
.
(ii). Index of normalized trade balance:
( ) /( ) ( ) /( )
i i i i i EXi IMi EXi IMi
EX IM EX IM
(iii). Index of ‘revealed comparative advantage’ (see, e.g. Laursen,
1998):
RCA
( )
i i TBi TB
where
2[( ) /( )]
i i i
EX IM EX IM
,
1
n
i
i
EX EX
,
1
n
i
i
IM IM
is a coefficient of normalization, and
( ) /( )
TB
EX IM EX IM
Positive (negative) values for RCAi imply comparat ive advantage
(disadvantage), while all values sum up to zero.
(iv). Index of intra-commodity trade (Grubel-Lloyd index):
ICT
1 [ /( )] 1 [ /( )]
i i i i i EXi IMi EXi IMi
EX IM EX IM
(v). Index of self-sufficiency:
SS
/( ) 1/(1 )
i i i i i IMi EXi
X X IM EX
(5)
From equations (1) and (5) it follows that
SS
( )
i i i i i
X IC C I
which implies that SSi could be conceived of as a (partial) multiplier of
gross national expenditure.
140 / EIRINI LERIOU, THEODORE MARIOLIS & GEORGE SOKLIS
(vi). Index of total import dependency:
IDΕ
/( ) /(1 )
i i i i i IMi IMi EXi
IM X IM EX
(6)
From equations (1) and (6) it follows that
IDE
(1 )( )
i i i i i i
X IC C I EX
which implies that, for a given value of the exports, 1 – IDEi could be
conceived of as a multiplier of gross national expenditure.
(vii). Index of import dependency of capital goods:
IDK
/( ) /[1 ( )]
i i i i i i IMi IMi EXi Ci
IM X IM EX C
(7)
From equations (1) and (7) it follows that
IDK
(1 )( )
i i i i i i
X IC I C EX
which implies that, for given values of both the total final consumption
and the exports, 1 – IDKi could be conceived of as a multiplier of the sum
of intermediate consumption and gross capital formation.
As is easily checked, when EXi < 1: (i) SSi is positive and, when
TBi > (<) 0, greater than (less than) 1; (ii) IDE
1
i
; and (iii) IDK ID
Εi i
.
MAIN EMPIRICAL RESULTS AND EVALUATION
The application of this system of indices to the SIOTs of the Greek economy
for the years 2005 and 2010 produced the following main results:
(i). Using the indices (%) of revealed comparative advantage and
normalized trade balance, the internationally tradable commodities (i.e.
exported or/and imported commodities) of the Greek economy can be
categorized into three groups (‘product mapping scheme’; Widodo, 2008).3
Table 1 refers to the year 2005, and shows that there are twenty-seven
commodities with comparative disadvantage (‘Group C’): twenty of them
(or
20 / 27 74%
) are industrial commodities. By contrast, there are
twenty-four commodities with comparative advantage (‘Groups A and B’):
two of them (or
2 / 24 8%
) are industrial commodities (the symbol ‘
’
indicates the arithmetic mean of an index).
Table 2 refers to the year 2010, and shows that there are twenty-nine
commodit ies with comparative disadvantage: nineteen of them (or
19 / 29 66%
) are industrial commodities. By contrast, there are twenty-
three commodities with compar ative adva ntage: three of them (or
3/ 23 13%
) are industrial commodities.
AN INTERSECTORAL ANALYSIS OF THE GREEK ECONOMY... / 141
Finally, Figure 1 shows the linear regression between the RCA values
of commodity i at time t2 = 2010 and those at time t1 = 2005, i.e.
2 1
RCA RCA
t t
i i
where and denote standard linear regression parameters, and
a residual
term. Since both the values of (
0.948
) and / R (
0.970
) are not
notably less than 1, it follows that there are no significant changes in the
pattern and degree, respectively, of international specialization of the Greek
economy (see Dalum et al., 1998).
Table 1
Product mapping scheme for the Greek economy; year 2005
Group A Group B
RCA
0
i
,
TBi > 0 RCA
0
i
,
TBi < 0
i = 3, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 35, 39, 4 6, 48, i = 1, 15, 33, 40, 42, 45, 47, 59, 61.
49, 53, 55, 56.
Total Number = 15 Total Number = 9
RCA
3.2%
i
, TB
44.3%
i
, ICΤ
55.7%
i
RCA
0.2%
i
, TB
12.9%
i
, ICΤ
87.9%
i
Group C
RCA
0
i
,
TBi < 0
i = 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14,
16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 26, 34, 37,
38, 41, 50, 58.
Total Number = 27
RCA
1.9%
i
, TB
64.1%
i
,
ICΤ
35.9%
i
Figure 1: Linear regression between the values of the revealed comparative advantage
indices; years 2 010 and 20 05
2
t
RCAi
1
t
RCAi
2 1 2
0.0002 0.948 , 0.955
t t
RCA RCA
i i R
10 10 20 30 40
10
10
20
30
142 / EIRINI LERIOU, THEODORE MARIOLIS & GEORGE SOKLIS
Table 3
The arithmetic means of the basic indices for the primary production,
industrial and service commodities; year 2005
ICi
m
ICi
m
/
ICi ICi
Ci
Ii
EXi
IMi
Primary Production 37.2 7.4 19 .9 70.8 -4.1 12.4 16.2
Industry 108.3 62.3 57.5 91.6 77.2 27.2 20 4.3
Services 54.2 9.8 18.1 47.6 2.6 7.3 11.7
Total Economy (AM) 74.0 29.7 40.1 65.4 30.7 15.1 85.3
Table 2
Product mapping scheme for the Greek economy; year 2010
Group A Group B
RCA
0
i
,
TBi > 0 RCA
0
i
,
TBi < 0
i = 3, 15, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 4 8, i = 1, 10, 35, 39, 40, 45, 46, 47, 4 9,
55, 56. 53, 61.
Total Number = 12 Total Number = 11
RCA
4.1%
i
, TB
49.5%
i
, ICΤ
50.6%
i
RCA
0.4%
i
, TB
12.0%
i
,
ICΤ
88.0%
i
Group C
RCA
0
i
,
TBi < 0
i = 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16,
17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 26, 34, 37, 38,
41, 42, 50, 58, 59, 62.
Total Number = 29
RCA
2.0%
i
,TB
63.7%
i
,
ICΤ
36.3%
i
(ii). There appears to be an underlying pattern in our empirical results:
bad index values are concentrated in industrial commodities, whereas good
index values are concentrated in service commodities. Moreover, the
findings for the year 2010 do not differ much from those for the year 2005,
which probably suggests that the structural features of the economy have
been shaped well before the emergence of the so-called Greek (or PIIGS)
crisis. These views are further supported by the figures in Tables 3 to 6,
which report the arithmetic means of the basic and derivatives indices for
the primary production, industrial and service commodities. Thus, it
can be stated that the industry sector is the ‘weak link’ in the Greek
economy.
AN INTERSECTORAL ANALYSIS OF THE GREEK ECONOMY... / 143
Table 4
The arithmetic means of the derivative indices for the primary production,
industrial and service commodities; year 2005
Si
TBi
RCAi
ICTi
SSi
IDEi
IDKi
Primary Production -8.0 -13.5 0.3 55.4 98.5 14.9 102.2
Industry -99.9 -58 .6 -1.9 37 .0 63.1 48.3 348.5
[70.9](iii)
Services -1.8 5.7 1.6 61.8 16 2.0 6.5 9.8
[4.7](i) [97.5](ii)
Total Economy(AM) -39.5 -23.2 0 50.8 12 1.3 22.8 143.2
[-36.4](i) [84.2]( ii) [36.9](iii)
Notes: (i) excluding the commodity 34 (
229.1%
Si
); (ii) excluding the commodity
32 ( SS
2418.6%
i
); and (iii) excluding the commodity 6 ( IDK
6733.7%
i
).
Table 5
The arithmetic means of the basic indices for the primary production,
industrial and service commodities; year 2010
ICi
m
ICi
/
m
ICi ICi
Ci
Ii
EXi
IMi
Primary Production 39.9 7.2 18 .0 57.2 1.4 15.4 14.0
Industry 116.6 72.3 62.0 74.5 126.2 29.3 24 6.7
Services 53.2 9.5 17.9 48.0 2.9 7.3 11.4
Total Economy(AM) 76.7 33.3 43.4 58.6 49.8 16.1 101.2
Table 6
The arithmetic means of the derivative indices for the primary production,
industrial and service commodities; year 2010
Si
TBi
RCAi
ICTi
SSi
IDEi
IDKi
Primary Production 2.8 -4.3 0.5 57.5 104.0 13.7 35.7
Industry -91.2 -55 .0 -1.8 41 .2 64.4 47.3 369.7
[73.9](iii)
Services -1.2 -6.0 1.4 57.4 157.7 7.2 11.6
[4.3](i) [97.1](ii)
Total Economy(AM) -35.3 -26.6 0 50.5 119.6 22.8 149.2
[-32.7](i) [84.8]( ii) [34.2](iii)
Notes: (i). excluding the commodity 34 (Si = –194.2%); (ii). excluding the commodity
32 (SSi = 2280.0%); and (iii). excluding the commodity 6 (IDKi = 717 4.0%).
(iii). In the year 2010, there are fourteen industrial and two service
commodities that are simultaneously characterized by a ‘low’ self-
144 / EIRINI LERIOU, THEODORE MARIOLIS & GEORGE SOKLIS
sufficiency index and ‘high’ import dependency indices.4 These ‘highly
import-dependent commodities’ are reported in Table 7: it is observed that
they all belong to Group C of Table 2, and it should also be noted that, in
value terms, their imports correspond to about 566% of their exports and
76% of the economy’s total imports, while their exports correspond to
22% of the economy’s total exports. At least nine of these commodities,
i.e. those with IDKi > 1, could be the immediate objective of a well-designed
industrial policy programme.5
By contrast, there are two primary production, one industrial and sixteen
service commodities that are simultaneously characterized by a high self-
sufficiency index and low import dependency indices. These ‘lowly import-
dependent commodities’ are reported in Table 8: it is observed that they all
belong to Groups A and B of Table 2, and it should also be noted that, in
value terms, their imports correspond to about 17% of their exports and
6% of the economy’s total imports, while their exports correspond to 57%
of the economy’s total exports.
Table 7
The highly import-dependent commodities in the Greek economy;
year 2010
iICi m
ICi Si TBi RCAi ICTi SSi IDEi IDKi
4 717.8 630.5 -617.8 -96.1 -10.48 3.9 14.1 87.7 87.7
5 23 .1 6.8 -18.1 -44.3 -2.4 3 55.7 84.3 25.5 128.7
6 40 .8 17.0 -153.2 -56.0 -2.78 44.0 46.6 74 .4 7174.0
8 100.8 73.6 -55.9 -79.1 -1.18 20.9 54.5 51.5 73 .6
11 165.7 125.7 -167.9 -65.4 -3.60 34.6 36.9 79.8 128.1
12 102.9 83.2 -197.4 -66.5 -3.36 33.5 35.6 80.7 262.1
13 117.2 53.5 -40.3 -44.7 -0.48 55.3 71.4 46.3 55.5
16 98.3 23 .3 -16.7 -74.6 -1.84 25.4 73.4 31.1 36.0
17 371.7 347.9 -495.4 -100 -4.12 0.0 5.6 94.4 10 8.0
18 77.3 60 .5 -26.0 -29.5 -0.15 70.5 63.7 79.8 115.6
19 24.9 19.2 72.1 -64 .1 -1.99 35.9 39.4 77.5 78.4
20 76.2 66 .3 -317.0 -94.7 -2.59 5.3 15.2 87.2 181.0
21 61.9 58 .5 -120.5 -72.1 -5.2 8 27.9 6.9 111.1 124.8
22 71.3 51 .3 -68.9 -83.1 -2.33 16.9 46.7 58.7 107.9
34 280.6 211.6 -194.2 -77.9 -6.42 22.1 34.0 75.4 79.0
42 59.1 20 .5 -24.1 -39.9 -0.27 60.1 80.6 34.1 71.6
AM 149.4 115.6 -152.6 -68.0 -3.1 32.0 44.3 68.5 550.8
AN INTERSECTORAL ANALYSIS OF THE GREEK ECONOMY... / 145
Table 8
The lowly import-dependent commodities in the Greek economy; year 2010
iICi m
ICi Si TBi RCAi ICTi SSi IDEi IDKi
1 58 .1 8.5 0.2 -7.1 0.94 92.9 98.0 14.7 24.8
3 27 .6 2.8 22.9 57.4 0.68 42.6 126.7 9.9 26 .7
27 13.6 0.2 81.7 38 .3 0.97 61 .7 101.4 1.1 1.2
28 32.6 0.00 13.4 100 1.05 0 107.1 0 0
29 40.4 0.00 19.1 100 5.63 0 110.5 0 0
30 40.6 0.00 19.0 100 2.91 0 110.4 0 0
31 27.2 1.1 0.8 15 .5 0.27 84 .5 100.8 2.2 8.1
32 2.3 0.3 95.6 99.1 34.06 0.9 22 80.0 9.7 18.4
35 96.5 1.8 -0.7 -25.8 0.00025 74.2 99.3 1.8 1.9
39 46.2 2.1 -0.7 -9.5 0.20 90.5 99.3 4.2 9.2
40 62.1 12.5 36.8 -6.4 0.25 93 .6 97.7 19.2 19.4
45 22.2 0.00 4.3 -14.5 0.15 85.5 98.5 5.9 6.3
46 89.5 5.4 -0.6 -11.5 0.07 88 .5 99.4 2.9 3.3
48 99.3 3.9 0.6 7.8 0.16 92.2 100.7 3.9 3.9
49 86.8 7.5 -1.8 -11.3 0.08 88 .7 98.3 8.6 10.1
53 93.4 1.4 -0.3 -10.1 0.05 89.9 99.7 1.5 1.6
55 1.9 0.1 0.1 27 .0 0.04 73 .0 100.1 0.1 5.9
56 2.2 0.01 0.1 27.0 0.06 73.0 100.1 0.2 7.7
61 39.6 2.2 -0.7 -6.4 0.04 93.6 99.3 5.5 13.9
AM 46.0 2.6 15.3 24.7 1.6 64.5 217.2 4.9 8.6
(iv). The values of the domestic intermediate consumption index,
d m
ICi ICi ICi
, are equal to the row-sums of the domestic direct output
coefficients (or Ghosh) matrix, DG, while the values of the imported
intermediate consumption index,
m
ICi
, are equal to the row-sums of the
imported direct output coefficients matrix, MG. Figures 2 and 3 refer to the
year 2010, and show that there are significant linear regressions between:
(i)
d
ICi
and the interindustry ‘forward linkages’, FLINKi , i.e. the row-sums
of the matrix [I – DG]–1; and (ii)
m
ICi
and the interindustry ‘forward leakages’,
FLEAKi, i.e. the row-sums of the matrix 1
G G
[ ]
I D M
, respectively..6
Finally, it is observed that there are fourteen commodities characterized
by high forward leakages. Eleven of them are highly import-dependent
commodities (see Tables AIII.1 and 7).
146 / EIRINI LERIOU, THEODORE MARIOLIS & GEORGE SOKLIS
(v). Our findings are compatible with those of empirical studies on the
‘static Sraffian matrix multiplier’ of autonomous demand (government
consumption expenditures, investments and exports) for the Greek economy
(which use input-output table data for the period 2000-2010).7 According
to those ‘backward linkages’ studies, (a) an effective demand management
policy could be mainly based on the service sector; (b) the whole economic
system, and especially its industry sector, is heavily dependent on imports;
and (c) the highly import-dependent commodities-industries (see Table 7
20 40 60 80 100
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
FLINKi
d
ICi
d
i
FLINK 0.960 0.017 ICi
2
0.938
R
Figure 2: Interin dustry forward linkages versus domestic intermediate consumption
indices; year 20 10
100 200 300 400 500 600 700
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
FLEAKi
m
ICi
m
i
FLEAK 0.083 0.010
ICi
2
0.992
R
Figure 3: Interin dustry forward leakages versus imported intermediate consumption
indices; year 20 10
AN INTERSECTORAL ANALYSIS OF THE GREEK ECONOMY... / 147
in the present paper) tend to be characterized by low output and employment
multipliers and, at the same time, by high import multipliers
CONCLUDING REMARKS
This intersectoral analysis identified main structural features and the highly
and lowly import-dependent commodities in the Greek economy. It has
been detected that a well-targeted effective demand management policy is
necessary but not sufficient for the recovery of this economy; that is to
say, industrial policy is also needed. More specifically, demand policy could
be mainly based on the service and the primary production sectors, which
include the vast majority of the revealed comparative advantage and lowly
import-dependent commodities. By contrast, the industry sector includes
the vast majority of the revealed comparative disadvantage and highly
import-dependent commodities; it is also characterized by negative gross
domestic savings, low intra-commodity specialization, and unfavourable
demand multiplier effects. Industrial policy could primarily focus on nine
industrial commodities that exhibit particu larly high direct impor t
dependency of capital goods.
It seems that intratemporal and intertemporal applications of this
‘forward and backward’ diagnostic system to input-output table data from
the ‘South’ and ‘North’ of the Eurozone would be of particular interest for
both structural and policy studies.
Acknowledgements
Earlier versions of this paper were presented at a Workshop of the ‘Study Group on
Sraffian Economics’ at the Panteion University, in November 2016, and at the ‘2nd
International Scientific Conference: Reconstruction of Production in Greece. Economic
Crisis and Growth Perspectives’, Technological and Education Institute of Central
Macedonia, Serres, Gr eece, 5-6 M ay 2017: we would like to thank Nikolaos
Ntemiroglou, Maria Pantzartzidou, Nikolaos Rodousakis, Lefteris Tsoulfidis and an
anonymous referee of this journal for very helpful comments and suggestions.
Furthermore, we are indebted to Thomas Moutos for many insightful remarks and
discussions.
Notes
1. After entering the European Monetary Union, the net annual national savings
in Greece became systematically negative. During the period 2000-2010, the
total net external borrowing of the country amounted to 148% of its total net
inves tments. For a ma croeconomi c an alys is of the falling ten dency of
savings in the Greek economy, see Katsimi and Moutos (2010); Mariolis (2017a,
ch. 2).
148 / EIRINI LERIOU, THEODORE MARIOLIS & GEORGE SOKLIS
2. For the data, see Appendix I in the present pap er.
3. The numerical results, for both the basic and the derivative indices, are reported
in Appendix II.
4. Hereafter, the term ‘low’ (‘high’) shall mean ‘lower (higher) than the arithmetic
mean of the total economy’, i.e., in the present case, lower than 84.8%, and
higher than 22.8% and 34.2% (see the last row and the notes in Table 6).
5. For basic dilemmas that such a policy would inevitably face, see Mariolis (2017b,
Section 2).
6. For the measurement of the interindustry forward linkages and leakages, see Reis
and Rua (2006). Our numerical results are reported in Appendix III.
7. See Mariolis and Soklis (2015, 2017) and Ntemiroglou (2016).
References
Dalum, B., Laursen, K. and Villumsen, G. (1998), Structural change in OECD export
specialisation patterns: De-specialisation and ‘stickiness’, International Review
of Applied Economics, 12 (3), pp. 447-467.
Katsimi, M. and Moutos, T. (2010), EMU and the Greek crisis: The political-economy
perspective, European Journal of Political Economy, 26 (4), pp. 568-576.
Laursen, K. (1998), Revealed comparative advantage and the alternatives as measures
of international specialization, Danish Research Unit for Industrial Dynamics,
Working paper 98-30, December 1998. http://www3.druid.dk/wp/19980030.pdf
Mariolis, T. (2017a), A New Economic Policy Programme for the Greek Economy,
Athens, Korontzis (in Greek).
Mariolis, T. (2017b), The foreign-trade leakages in the Greek economy: Evidence
from the supply and use table for the year 2010, East-West Journal of Economics
and Business (forthcoming).
Mariolis, T. and Soklis, G. (2015), The static Sraffian multiplier for the Greek economy:
Evidence from the supply and use table for the year 2010, Review of Keynesian
Economics (forthcoming).
Mariolis, T. and Soklis, G. (2017), The static Sraffian multiplier for the Greek economy:
Evidence from the symmetric input-output table for the year 2010, Mimeo, Study
Group on Sraffian Economics, Department of Public Administration, Panteion
University, April 2017.
Ntemiroglou, N. (2016) The Sraffian multiplier and the key-commodities for the Greek
economy: Evidence from the input-output tables for the period 2000-2010,
Bulletin of Political Economy, 10 (1), pp. 1-24.
Reis, H. and Rua, A. (2006) An input-output analysis: Linkages versus leakages, Banco
de Portugal, Working Papers 17.
Widodo, T. (2008) Dynamic changes in comparative advantage: Japan “flying geese”
model and its implications for China, Journal of Chinese Economic and Foreign
Trade Studies, 1 (3), pp. 200-213.
AN INTERSECTORAL ANALYSIS OF THE GREEK ECONOMY... / 149
APPENDIX I: A NOTE ON THE DATA
The SIOTs of the Greek economy, for the years 2005 through 2010, are provided via
the EUROSTAT website, http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu. The available SIOTs describe
65 products and industries. However, the elements associated with the products
‘Imputed rents of owner-occupied dwellings’ and ‘Services provided by extraterritorial
organisations and bodies’ are all equal to zero and, therefore, we remove them from
our analysis. Thus, we derive SIOTs that describe 63 product/industry groups.
The described products and their correspondence to CPA (Classification of
Products by Activity) are reported in Table A.Ι.1. The products 1 to 3 belong to ‘Primary
production’. The products 4 to 27 belong to ‘Industry’: (i) the commodity 4 corresponds
to ‘Mining and quarrying’; (ii) the products 5 to 23 correspond to ‘Processing products’;
(iii) the product 24 corresponds to ‘Energy’; (iv) the products 25 and 26 correspond
to ‘Water supply and waste disposal’; and (v) the commodity 27 corresponds to
‘Construction’. The products 28 to 63 belong to ‘Services’, while the products 54 to
57 are primarily related to the ‘Public Sector’.
It should be noted that products 36 (‘Accommodation and food services’) and 52
(‘Travel agency, tour operator and other reservation services and related services’),
which are related to tourism activities, display zero exports and imports because the
SIOTs do not record the travel receipts and payments.
Table A.I.1.
Product Classification
No CPA Nomenclature
1 A01 Products of agriculture, hunting and related services
2 A02 Products of forestry, logging and related services
3 A03 Fish and other fishing products; aquaculture products; support services
to fishing
4 B Mining and quarrying
5 C1 0-C12 Food products, beverages and tobacco products
6 C1 3-C15 Textiles, wearing apparel and leather products
7 C16 Wood and of products of wood and cork, except fu rniture; articles of
straw and plaiting materials
8 C17 Paper and paper products
9 C18 Printing and recording services
10 C19 Coke and refined petroleum products
11 C20 Chemicals and chemical products
12 C21 Basic pharmaceutical products and pharmaceutical preparations
13 C22 Rubber and plastics products
14 C23 Other non-metallic mineral products
15 C24 Basic metals
16 C25 Fabricated metal products, except machinery and equipment
17 C26 Computer, electronic and optical products
18 C27 Electrical equipment
19 C28 Machinery and equipment n .e.c.
150 / EIRINI LERIOU, THEODORE MARIOLIS & GEORGE SOKLIS
20 C29 Motor vehicles, trailers and semi-trailers
21 C30 Other transport equipment
22 C31-C3 2 Furniture; other manufactured goods
23 C33 Repair and installation services of machinery and equipment
24 D35 Electricity, gas, steam and air-con ditioning
25 E36 Natural water; water treatment and supply services
26 E37-E39 Sewerage; waste collection, treatment and disposal activities; materials
recovery; remediation activities and other waste management services
27 F Constructions and construction works
28 G45 Wholesale and retail trade and repair services of motor vehicles and
motorcycles
29 G46 Wholesale trade services, except of motor vehicles and motorcycles
30 G47 Retail trade services, except of motor vehicles and motorcycles
31 H49 Land transport services and transport services via pipelines
32 H50 Water transport services
33 H51 Air transport services
34 H52 Warehousing and support services for transportation
35 H53 Postal and courier services
36 I Accommodation and food services
37 J58 Publishing services
38 J59-J60 Motion picture, video and television programme production services,
sound recording and music publishing; programming and broadcasting
services
39 J61 Telecommunications services
40 J62-J63 Computer programming, consultancy and related services; information
services
41 K64 Financial services, except in surance and pension funding
42 K65 Insurance, reinsurance and pension funding services, except compulsory
social secu rity
43 K66 Services auxiliary to financial services and insurance services
44 L68B Real estate services (excluding imputed rent)
45 M69-M70 Legal and accounting services; services of head offices; management
consulting services
46 M7 1 Architectural and engineering services; technical testing and analysis
services
47 M7 2 Scientific research and development services
48 M7 3 Advertising and market research services
49 M74-M75 Other professional, scientific and technical services; veterinary services
50 N77 Rental and leasing services
51 N78 Employment services
52 N79 Travel agency, tour operator and other reservation services and related
services
53 N80-N82 Security and investigation services; services to buildings and landscape;
office administrative, office support and other business support services
54 O84 Pu blic administration and defence services; compulsory social security
services
55 P85 Education services
56 Q86 Human health services
AN INTERSECTORAL ANALYSIS OF THE GREEK ECONOMY... / 151
57 Q87-Q88 Social work services
58 R90-R9 2 Creative, arts and entertainment services; library, archive, museum and
other cultural services; gambling and betting services
59 R93 Sporting services and amusement and recreation services
60 S94 Services furnished by membership organisations
61 S95 Repair services of computers and personal and household goods
62 S96 Other personal services
63 T Services of households as employers; undifferentiated goods and services
produced by households for own use
APPENDIX II: THE NUMERICAL RESULTS FOR THE BASIC AND
DERIVATIVE INDICES
The numerical values of the basic and derivative indices are reported in Tables A.II.1
to A.II.4. In the fourth columns of Tables A.II.1 and A.II.3, the values in square brackets
correspond to the index of gross fixed capital formation. Finally, the symbol ‘AM’
indicates the arithmetic mean of an index, and the symbol ‘�mICi’ indicates the imported
intermediate consumption index.
Table A.II.1
The numerical values (%) of the basic indices; year 2005
i�ICi �m
ICi �Ci �Ii �EXi �IMi
1 62.8 7.1 38 .0 2.9 [0.7] 9.1 12.7
2 27.1 12.9 93.8 1.9 [1.3] 4.7 27.5
3 21.6 2.2 80 .7 -17.2 [0] 23.4 8.5
4 415.6 325.4 0 29.8 [0] 8.2 353.7
5 32.0 5.1 88 .6 -5.0 [0] 12.0 27.6
6 36.2 17.6 16 6.0 -34.6 [0] 46.0 113.8
7 91.0 29.4 4.1 45.4 [0.5] 3.8 44.3
8 146.9 77.3 58 .0 -20.3 [0] 9.9 94.5
9 97.3 0.3 1.7 1.3 [0] 0 0.3
10 71.9 32.3 50.6 6.1 [0] 25.7 54.3
11 162.7 116.6 90.2 1.9 [0] 40.1 194.9
12 121.4 95 .8 105.4 5.5 [0] 50.7 183.0
13 111.6 56 .7 33.3 4.0 [0] 26 .2 75.1
14 101.2 18 .5 10.4 2.4 [0] 9.7 23.7
15 117.6 53 .8 0.1 4.6 [0] 32.7 54.9
16 104.4 39 .0 15.9 33.7 [6.7] 7.0 61 .0
17 223.8 204.8 99.9 556.6 [541.9] 49.9 830.3
18 95.4 66.4 52.7 25.3 [21.9] 49.2 122.7
19 108.3 97 .6 4.9 250.5 [244.1] 59.2 322.8
20 168.1 162.1 1132.2 525.2 [473.3] 35 .3 1760 .8
21 28.3 25.8 60.3 267.6 [262.5] 171.7 427.9
22 77.2 55.0 90.9 55.6 [48.8] 8.0 131.7
contd table A.II.1
152 / EIRINI LERIOU, THEODORE MARIOLIS & GEORGE SOKLIS
23 83.1 0 0.7 16.2 [15.6] 0 0
24 66.2 1.7 36.2 0 [0] 0.2 2.6
25 54.3 0 45.7 0 [0] 0 0
26 70.8 14.0 44.8 0 [0] 7.2 22.8
27 14.6 0.04 4.6 80.2 [80.6] 0.8 0.3
28 36.8 0 52.1 5.0 [4.9] 6.1 0
29 45.7 0 37.6 7.5 [7.3] 9.1 0
30 41.9 0 40.3 8.0 [7.9] 9.8 0
31 27.7 0.9 71 .4 0 [0] 2.2 1.3
32 2.4 0.2 1.7 0 [0] 96.0 0.1
33 49.4 6.6 50 .6 0 [0] 13.4 13.4
34 306.3 240.4 22.8 0 [0] 29.1 258.2
35 93.5 3.4 5.1 0 [0] 4.9 3.5
36 10.3 0 89.7 0 [0] 0 0
37 42.2 11.8 64.2 18.1 [18.1] 8.2 32.7
38 48.9 5.6 48 .1 8.7 [8.7] 5.4 11.1
39 38.5 1.5 60 .8 0 [0] 4.2 3.5
40 66.4 10.5 1.5 35.8 [35.8] 12.4 16.1
41 79.2 4.6 26 .8 0 [0] 0.2 6.2
42 61.9 15.1 47.1 0 [0] 16.3 25.4
43 99.5 0.01 0.5 0 [0] 0 0
44 26.8 0 72.5 0.7 [0.7] 0 0
45 84.1 0 6.7 9.3 [9.3] 3.9 4.0
46 93.2 3.4 6.2 0 [0] 4.2 3.6
47 55.6 14.6 44.5 0 [0] 14.5 14.6
48 98.5 5.4 0 0 [0] 6.9 5.4
49 88.6 5.3 10 .5 0 [0] 6.8 5.9
50 85.1 10.3 20 0 [0] 3.9 9.1
51 93.9 0 6.1 0 [0] 0 0
52 47.6 0 52.4 0 [0] 0 0
53 91.1 1.5 8.6 0 [0] 1.9 1.6
54 0 0 10 0 0 [0] 0 0
55 2.5 0.1 97.4 0 [0] 0.2 0.1
56 3.1 0.02 96.7 0 [0] 0.3 0.1
57 3.8 0 96.2 0 [0] 0 0
58 26.7 1.3 74 .2 0 [0] 0.7 1.5
59 50.6 7.4 49 .6 0 [0] 0.3 0.5
60 6.3 0.1 93.7 0 [0] 0 0
61 41.0 1.0 59 .6 0 [0] 1.9 2.5
62 2.3 0 97.7 0 [0] 0 0
63 0 0 10 0 0 [0] 0 0
AM 74.0 29.7 65.4 30.7 [28.4] 15.1 85.3
i�ICi �m
ICi �Ci �Ii �EXi �IMi
AN INTERSECTORAL ANALYSIS OF THE GREEK ECONOMY... / 153
Table A.II.2
The numerical values (%) of the derivatives indices; year 2005
i�Si �TBi �RCAi �ICTi �SSi �IDEi �IDKi
1 -0.7 -16.4 0.56 83.6 96.5 12.2 19.3
2 -20.9 -70.7 -0.03 29.3 81.5 22.4 94.8
3 -2.3 46.5 0.52 53.5 117.4 10.0 192.6
4 -31 5.6 -95.5 -7.47 4.5 22.4 79.4 79.4
5 -20.6 -39.3 -1.52 60.7 86.5 23.9 10 2.3
6 -10 2.3 -42.4 -1.71 57 .6 59.6 67.8 6733.7
7 4.9 -84 .4 -0.68 15.6 71.2 31.5 32 .5
8 -10 4.9 -81.0 -1.32 19 .0 54.2 51.2 74.7
9 1.0 -77 .9 -0.01 22.1 99.8 0.3 0.3
10 -22.5 -35.8 -1.08 64.2 77.7 42.2 69.6
11 -152.9 -65.9 -3.70 34.1 39.2 76.5 118.4
12 -126.9 -56.6 -2.34 43.4 43.0 78.8 14 4.2
13 -44.9 -48.3 -0.59 51.7 67.2 50.4 64.9
14 -11.6 -41.9 -0.33 58.1 87.7 20 .8 22.9
15 -17.6 -25.4 0.18 74.6 81.8 44 .9 44.9
16 -20.3 -79.3 -2.81 20.7 64.9 39.6 44.2
17 -223.8 -88.7 -4.45 11.3 11.4 94.3 10 6.4
18 -48.2 -42.7 -0.65 57.3 57.7 70.7 10 1.6
19 -13.1 -69.0 -2.84 31.0 27.5 88.8 90.0
20 -1200.3 -96 .1 -6.45 3.9 5.5 96.5 254.0
21 11.4 -42.7 -1.59 57.3 28.1 120.1 144.6
22 -68.1 -88.5 -2.98 11.5 44.7 58.9 99.2
23 16.2 ––– ––– ––– 10 0 0 0
24 -2.4 -84.4 -0.20 15.6 97 .7 2.6 4.0
25 0 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
26 -15.6 -51.8 -0.24 48.2 86.5 19.8 32.3
27 80.7 47.9 0.53 52.1 100.5 0.3 0.3
28 11.2 100 0.91 0 106.5 0 0
29 16.7 100 5.27 0 110.1 0 0
30 17.8 100 3.58 0 110.9 0 0
31 0.9 27.0 0.24 73.0 10 1.0 1.3 4.6
32 95.9 99.7 36.29 0.3 2418.6 3.0 5.0
33 0 -0.0016 0.31 100.0 100.0 13.4 27.1
34 -229.1 -79.8 -5.77 20.2 30.4 78.4 84.3
35 1.4 16.2 0.07 83.8 10 1.4 3.6 3.8
36 0 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
37 -6.4 -60.0 -0.51 40.0 80 .3 26.2 54.2
38 3.0 -34.9 -0.05 65.1 94 .6 10.5 19.2
39 0.7 8.7 0.38 91.3 100.7 3.5 9.1
40 32.1 -13.0 0.09 87.0 96.4 15.5 15.8
41 -6.0 -94.4 -0.82 5.6 94.3 5.8 7.8
42 -9.1 -21.7 0.07 78.3 91 .7 23.3 40 .9
contd. Table A.II.2
154 / EIRINI LERIOU, THEODORE MARIOLIS & GEORGE SOKLIS
43 0 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
44 0.7 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
45 9.2 -1.2 0.23 98.8 99 .9 4.0 4.3
46 0.6 7.3 0.18 92.7 100.6 3.7 3.9
47 -0.1 -0.4 0.09 99.6 99.9 14.6 26 .3
48 1.5 11.9 0.22 88 .1 101.5 5.5 5.5
49 0.9 7.1 0.21 92.9 100.9 5.9 6.6
50 -5.1 -39.5 -0.04 60.5 95 .1 8.6 10.6
51 0 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
52 0 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
53 0.3 8.7 0.12 91.3 100.3 1.6 1.8
54 0 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
55 0.1 41.6 0.05 58 .4 100.1 0.1 3.6
56 0.2 41.6 0.08 58 .4 100.2 0.1 4.1
57 0 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
58 -0.9 -39.3 -0.02 60.7 99 .1 1.5 5.8
59 -0.2 -25.2 0.0002 74.8 99 .8 0.5 0.9
60 0 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
61 -0.6 -13.0 0.01 87.0 99.4 2.5 6.0
62 0 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
63 0 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
AM -39.5 -23.2 0 50 .8 121.3 22.8 143.2
Table A.II.3
The numerical values (%) of the basic indices; year 2010
i�ICi �m
ICi �Ci �Ii �EXi �IMi
1 58.1 8.5 41 .7 2.2 [0.9] 13.0 15.0
2 34.2 10.2 80.5 0.1 [1.2] 4.3 19.1
3 27.6 2.8 49 .5 1.8 [0] 28.9 7.8
4 717.8 630.5 0 -7.3 [0] 12.4 622.9
5 23.1 6.8 95 .1 0.5 [0] 11.7 30.3
6 40.8 17.0 21 2.4 -38.6 [0] 45.0 159.6
7 113.3 20.2 3.4 1.2 [0.6] 3.1 20 .9
8 100.8 73.6 55 .2 27.4 [0] 11.0 94.4
9 92.9 0.7 2.5 5.2 [0] 0.2 0.8
10 49.7 18.4 55.4 2.0 [0] 31.3 38.4
11 165.7 125.7 102.2 2.8 [0] 45.2 215.9
12 102.9 83 .2 194.5 -16.3 [0] 45.7 226.7
13 117.2 53 .5 23.1 -0.2 [0] 24.8 64 .9
14 101.1 16 .9 10 -0.8 [0] 11.1 21.4
15 98.3 39.5 0.1 -1.8[0 ] 43.5 40.1
16 98.3 23.3 18.4 19.6 [3.9] 6.2 42.4
17 371.7 347.9 223.7 1183.2 [1140.7] 0 16 78.7
contd. Table A.II.3
i�Si �TBi �RCAi �ICTi �SSi �IDEi �IDKi
AN INTERSECTORAL ANALYSIS OF THE GREEK ECONOMY... / 155
18 77.3 60.5 48.7 31.1 [30.3] 68.2 125.3
19 24.9 19.3 3.0 225.8 [224.9] 42.9 196.6
20 76.2 66.3 340.8 240.3 [181.5] 15.7 57 3.0
21 61.9 58.5 158.6 1225.4 [1203.9] 260.1 1606.0
22 71.3 51.3 97.6 45.3 [42.2] 11.6 125.8
23 94.1 0 1.5 4.4 [7.8] 0 0
24 55.9 7.6 57 .2 0 [0] 2.2 15.4
25 54.6 0 45.4 0 [0] 0 0
26 76.1 14.4 35.6 0 [0] 9.4 21.1
27 13.6 0.6 4.7 80.3 [84.7] 2.5 1.1
28 32.6 0 54.0 6.7 [6.7] 6.6 0
29 40.4 0 40.5 9.6 [9.6] 9.5 0
30 40.6 0 40.3 9.6 [9.5] 9.4 0
31 27.2 1.1 72 .0 0 [0] 3.0 2.2
32 2.3 0.3 2.1 0 [0] 96.0 0.4
33 37.0 5.0 57 .7 0 [0] 18.2 12.9
34 280.6 211.6 13.6 0 [0] 27.6 221.8
35 96.5 1.8 4.3 0 [0] 1.1 1.8
36 11.8 0 88.2 0 [0] 0 0
37 36.5 3.4 54 .2 19.2 [19.2] 4.1 14.0
38 54.2 7.8 42 .4 12.3 [12.3] 5.1 13.9
39 46.2 2.1 54 .5 0 [0] 3.5 4.3
40 62.1 12.5 1.1 39.1 [39.1] 17.3 19.6
41 83.2 10.2 27.2 0 [0] 3.1 13.5
42 59.1 20.5 65.0 0 [0] 18.2 42.3
43 96.3 0 3.7 0 [0] 0 0
44 22.2 0 77.2 0.5 [0.5] 0 0
45 89.5 5.4 6.2 5.9 [5.9] 4.5 6.0
46 88.7 2.6 11.9 0 [0] 2.3 2.9
47 53.0 18.3 52.9 0 [0] 12.5 18.3
48 99.3 3.9 0 0 [0] 4.5 3.8
49 86.8 7.5 15 .0 0 [0] 7.0 8.7
50 86.8 12.2 22.3 0 [0] 3.4 12.5
51 99.3 0 0.7 0 [0] 0 0
52 43.0 0 57.0 0 [0] 0 0
53 93.4 1.4 6.9 0 [0] 1.2 1.5
54 0 0 10 0 0 [0] 0 0
55 1.9 0.1 98.0 0 [0] 0.2 0.1
56 2.2 0.01 97.7 0 [0] 0.3 0.2
57 4.2 0 95.8 0 [0] 0 0
58 31.9 2.3 70 .4 0 [0] 0.7 3.0
59 58.1 6.7 42 .2 0 [0] 0.2 0.6
60 6.1 0 93.9 0 [0] 0 0
61 39.6 2.2 61 .0 0 [0] 4.8 5.5
62 1.4 10-6 98 .6 0 [0] 0 0.0004
63 0.1 0 99.9 0 [0] 0 0
AM 76.7 33.3 58.6 49.8 [48.0] 16.1 101.2
i�ICi �m
ICi �Ci �Ii �EXi �IMi
156 / EIRINI LERIOU, THEODORE MARIOLIS & GEORGE SOKLIS
Table A.II.4
The numerical values (%) of the derivatives indices; year 2010
i�Si �TBi �RCAi �ICTi �SSi �IDEi �IDKi
1 0.2 -7.1 0.94 92.9 98.0 14.7 24.8
2 -14.6 -63.1 -0.02 36.9 87.1 16.7 55.7
3 22.9 57 .4 0.68 42.6 126.7 9.9 26.7
4 -61 7.8 -96.1 -10.4 8 3.9 14.1 87.7 87.7
5 -18.1 -44.3 -2.43 55.7 84.3 25.5 12 8.7
6 -15 3.2 -56.0 -2.78 44 .0 46.6 74.4 7174.0
7 -16.6 -74.4 -0.32 25.6 84.9 17.7 18.3
8 -55.9 -79.1 -1.18 20.9 54.5 51.5 73.6
9 4.7 -52 .4 -0.01 47.6 99.5 0.8 0.8
10 -5.1 -10.2 2.75 89.8 93 .4 35.8 74 .3
11 -167.9 -65.4 -3.60 34.6 36.9 79.8 128.1
12 -197.4 -66.5 -3.36 33.5 35.6 80.7 26 2.1
13 -40.3 -44.7 -0.48 55.3 71.4 46.3 55.5
14 -11.1 -31.8 -0.10 68.2 90.7 19 .4 21.3
15 1.6 4.1 2.20 95.9 103.6 41.5 41.5
16 -16.7 -74.6 -1.84 25.4 73.4 31.1 36.0
17 -495.4 -100 -4.12 0.0 5.6 94.4 108.0
18 -26.0 -29.5 -0.15 70.5 63.7 79.8 115.6
19 72.1 -64.1 -1.99 35.9 39.4 77.5 78.4
20 -317.0 -94.7 -2.59 5.3 15.2 87.2 18 1.0
21 -120.5 -72.1 -5.28 27.9 6. 9 111.1 124.8
22 -68.9 -83.1 -2.33 16.9 46.7 58.7 10 7.9
23 4.4 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
24 -13.1 -74.6 -1.31 25.4 88.4 13.6 27.5
25 0 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
26 -11.7 -38.3 -0.17 61.7 89.6 18 .9 27.7
27 81.7 38.3 0.97 61.7 10 1.4 1.1 1.2
28 13.4 100 1.05 0 107.1 0 0
29 19.1 100 5.63 0 110.5 0 0
30 19.0 100 2.91 0 110.4 0 0
31 0.8 15.5 0.27 84 .5 100.8 2.2 8.1
32 95.6 99.1 34.06 0.9 2280.0 9.7 18.4
33 5.4 17.2 0.55 82.8 105.7 13.6 34.8
34 -194.2 -77.9 -6.42 22.1 34.0 75.4 79.0
35 -0.7 -25.8 0.000 25 74.2 99.3 1.8 1.9
contd. Table A.II.4
AN INTERSECTORAL ANALYSIS OF THE GREEK ECONOMY... / 157
36 0 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
37 9.3 -54.5 -0.40 45.5 91 .0 12.7 25.1
38 3.4 -46.6 -0.16 53.4 91 .9 12.8 20.9
39 -0.7 -9.5 0.20 90.5 99.3 4.2 9.2
40 36.8 -6.4 0.25 93 .6 97.7 19.2 19.4
41 -10.4 -62.2 -1.15 37.8 90.6 12.3 16.3
42 -24.1 -39.9 -0.27 60.1 80.6 34.1 71.6
43 0 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
44 0.5 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
45 4.3 -14.5 0.15 85.5 98.5 5.9 6.3
46 -0.6 -11.5 0.07 88.5 99.4 2.9 3.3
47 -5.8 -18.9 0.03 81.1 94 .5 17.3 34 .5
48 0.6 7.8 0.16 92.2 100.7 3.9 3.9
49 -1.8 -11.3 0.08 88.7 98.3 8.6 10.1
50 -9.1 -56.8 -0.12 43.2 91 .7 11.5 14.4
51 0 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
52 0 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
53 -0.3 -10.1 0.05 89.9 99.7 1.5 1.6
54 0 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
55 0.1 27.0 0.04 73.0 10 0.1 0.1 5.9
56 0.1 27.0 0.06 73.0 10 0.1 0.2 7.7
57 0 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
58 -2.3 -63.7 -0.10 36.3 97 .7 2.9 9.3
59 -0.3 -40.0 -0.0014 60.0 99.7 0.6 1.0
60 0 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
61 -0.7 -6.4 0.04 93.6 99.3 5.5 13.9
62 -0.0004 -100 -10- 5 0 99.99 0.0004 0.03
63 0 ––– ––– ––– 100 0 0
AM –35.3 –2 6.6 0 50.5 119.6 22 .8 149.2
i�Si �TBi �RCAi �ICTi �SSi �IDEi �IDKi
158 / EIRINI LERIOU, THEODORE MARIOLIS & GEORGE SOKLIS
APPENDIX III: THE NUMERICAL RESULTS FOR THE INTERINDUSTRY
FORWARD LINKAGES AND LEAKAGES
The numerical results are reported in Table A.III.1, where the symbol ‘*’ indicates the
commodities characterized by high forward leakages.
Table A.III.1
The interindustry forward linkages and leakages; year 2010
i FLINKiFLEAKi
1 1.66 0.13
2 1.47 0.23
3 1.30 0.04
4* 2.32 6.55
5 1.20 0.08
6 1.36 0.22
7* 2.76 0.63
8* 1.50 0.83
9 2.59 0.13
10 1.48 0.27
11* 1.65 1.42
12* 1.21 0.84
13* 1.96 0.69
14 2.11 0.25
15* 2.03 0.64
16 1.97 0.36
17* 1.39 3.52
18* 1.24 0.64
19 1.09 0.21
20* 1.15 0.68
21* 1.05 0.59
22* 1.23 0.52
23 2.27 0.12
24 1.82 0.2
25 1.85 0.09
26 2.00 0.21
27 1.18 0.01
28 1.49 0.07
29 1.59 0.08
30 1.57 0.07
31 1.38 0.09
32 1.03 0.01
33 1.57 0.15
34* 1.91 2.25
35 3.20 0.28
36 1.17 0.03
37 1.57 0.08
38 2.00 0.17
AN INTERSECTORAL ANALYSIS OF THE GREEK ECONOMY... / 159
39 1.79 0. 08
40 1.88 0. 2
41 2.19 0. 22
42 1.62 0. 28
43 2.62 0. 09
44 1.36 0. 04
45 2.45 0. 25
46 2.34 0. 15
47 1.59 0. 22
48 2.76 0. 19
49 2.25 0. 21
50* 2.27 0. 48
51 3.11 0. 24
52 1.63 0. 05
53 2.57 0. 19
54 1.00 0. 00
55 1.03 0. 01
56 1.03 0. 00
57 1.08 0. 01
58 1.53 0. 06
59 1.89 0. 12
60 1.1 0.02
61 1.58 0. 07
62 1.02 0. 00
63 1.00 0. 00
AM 1.71 0. 42
