Comparing the Economic Impact of an Export Shock in Two Modeling Frameworks

Because of more restrictive assumptions on regional input-output (IO) models compared to computable general equilibrium (CGE) models, the literature agrees IO results are intuitively consistent with long run equilibrium but otherwise overestimated. We compare the results of IO and CGE models from an exogenous export shock under various labor market constraints and capital closures. Consistent with the literature, we find the IO model's results do not match those of the CGE models. But contrary to conventional wisdom, the positive secondary impacts are larger with the CGE models than with the IO model. Furthermore, we find the closest match between direct effects is when the CGE model has short run restrictions. Our finding means that the common view of CGE model results being both lower in estimate and more accurate in the short run than IO models does not universally hold. Thus researchers’ choice of models and interpretation of results need to be more nuanced and cautious than previously thought.