I asked something along these lines a year or two ago, but can't find it, so I'll just ask again: Every year, we produce estimates of tourist spending in our state and the economic impact of that spending. From 2002-2007, the dollar figure for total spent by tourists in the state was very close to the dollar figure for direct output. In 2008, the figure for total spent by tourists was instead very close to the combined output figure (and, therefore, much higher than direct output). This pattern held for 2009. We recently revised our model, and now, the tourist spending falls in between direct and combined output. In the past, it made sense to people looking at our numbers that spending would be very close to direct output. I've explained that the amount spent is more than the direct output because not everything is produced within the state, therefore the difference between spending and direct output is essentially leakage. They're having a hard time understanding why this relationship changed over the years. I know between 2007 and 2008, we switched from the 509 to 440 sectors (Doug did this conversion for me; our model at the time had a ridiculous amount of sectors within a ridiclous amount of groups). This coincides with the drastic change in spending to direct/combined output relationship, and I can't fully explain it. Can you help me explain any of this? Scott helped us redo our model this past fall, so he can attest to the very complicated model we'd been using and may have some insight into this. I'm not sure! Please let me know if I should work with Scott in investigating this. Thanks, any insight is very much appreciated. Kara
Please sign in to leave a comment.