Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32490209›Full record

ArticleJournal of global economic analysis2019

Tools for Open Source, Subnational CGE Modeling with an Illustrative Analysis of Carbon Leakage.

Thomas F Rutherford, Andrew Schreiber

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of global economic analysis, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Thomas F RutherfordDepartment of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Taylor Hall, 427 Lorch Street, Madison, WI 53706, USA.
Andrew SchreiberNational Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20460, USA.

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper introduces the Wisconsin National Data Consortium (WiNDC) framework for producing self-consistent accounts based on publicly available datasets that can be used in sub-national economic equilibrium analysis in the United States. We describe the process used to generate regional social accounting matrices and a calibrated static multi-regional, multi-sectoral computable general equilibrium model conformal with the constructed dataset. As illustration, we show how the core model can be applied for the analysis of energy-environment issues. We use an energy-economy extension of the core model to assess the effectiveness of several state level greenhouse gas mitigation proposals. Sub-national abatement measures result in carbon leakage - mandated reductions in controlled areas may be vitiated by increased emissions in uncontrolled jurisdictions. Using a WiNDC-based model, we calculate leakage rates and show how these depend on the underlying trade model. Our calculations demonstrate the importance of both data and modeling assumptions for the simulation of policy experiments.

Indexed as

Air PollutionApplied Economic AnalysisC6C8Computable General Equilibrium ModelsD5Multi-regional ModelsQ5R1Regional Economies

Identifiers

PMID32490209
PMCPMC7266100

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.