Regional disaster impact analysis: comparing input–output and computable general equilibrium models

Abstract

Abstract. A large variety of models has been developed to assess the economic losses of disasters, of which the most common ones are Input-Output (IO) and Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) models. In addition, an increasing numbers of scholars has developed hybrid approaches; one that combines both or either of them in combination with non-economic methods. While both IO and CGE models are widely used, they are mainly compared on theoretical grounds. Few studies have compared disaster impacts of different model types in a systematic way and for the same geographical area, using similar input data. Such a comparison is valuable from both a scientific and policy perspective as the magnitude and the spatial distribution of the estimated losses are likely to vary with the chosen modelling approach (IO, CGE, or hybrid). Hence, regional disaster impact loss estimates resulting from a range of models facilitates better decisions and policy making. Therefore, in this study we analyze one specific case study, using three regional models: two hybrid IO models and a regionally calibrated version of a global CGE model. The case study concerns two flood scenarios in the Po-river basin in Italy. Modelling results indicate that the difference in estimated total (national) economic losses and the regional distribution of those losses may vary by up to a factor of seven between the three models, depending on the type of recovery path. Total economic impact, comprising all Italian regions, is negative in all models though.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 145 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.