the_complete_and_consistent_data_base_coco_for_the_national_scale
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revisionNext revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
the_complete_and_consistent_data_base_coco_for_the_national_scale [2020/02/13 08:04] – [COCO2: Data Preparation] matsz | the_complete_and_consistent_data_base_coco_for_the_national_scale [2020/02/13 09:26] – [COCO2: Estimation procedure] matsz | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 552: | Line 552: | ||
====COCO2: Estimation procedure==== | ====COCO2: Estimation procedure==== | ||
+ | **Include file // | ||
+ | The approach to determine consumer prices is to distribute food expenditure on groups with consumption quantities given from COCO1 results such that endogenous consumer prices link endogenous expenditure with exogenous quantities. Deviations of estimated expenditure and consumer prices from their supports is penalised in an entropy framework. Estimation is done year by year, starting with the most recent year where hard data are usually available to a greater extent than for the oldest years in the database. Including consumer price changes (always relative to the previously solved year) serves to stabilise the results to some extent such that the objective does not only have supports for the consumer prices, but also for their changes. The entropy problem is solved by maximizing: | ||
+ | \begin{align} | ||
+ | \begin{split} | ||
+ | max_t &- \sum_{m, | ||
+ | & | ||
+ | & | ||
+ | & | ||
+ | & | ||
+ | & | ||
+ | & | ||
+ | |||
+ | \end{split} | ||
+ | \end{align} | ||
+ | |||
+ | where //m// represents the region, //j// the food item with consumer price, FOPOS the food group, //t// stands for the current estimation year, t_1 for the year estimated before and k for the number of support points (=3). | ||
+ | |||
+ | Parameters are | ||
+ | | \(HCOM_{m, | ||
+ | | \(UVAD_{m, | ||
+ | |\(CPS_{m, | ||
+ | |\(DCPS_{m, | ||
+ | |\(EXS_{m, | ||
+ | |\(TOFACS_{m, | ||
+ | |\(PQ_k\) |A priori probabilities for support points| | ||
+ | |\(TOFO_{m, | ||
+ | |\(PE_{m, | ||
+ | |\(PED_{m, | ||
+ | |\(CP_{m, | ||
+ | |\(DCP_{m, | ||
+ | |\(PEX_{m, | ||
+ | |\(PFAC_{m, | ||
+ | |\(EX_{mFOPOS}\) |Group expenditures| | ||
+ | |\(TOFAC_m\) |Food expenditure slack| | ||
+ | |||
+ | Constraints are as follows: | ||
+ | Summing up probabilities for support points | ||
+ | |||
+ | \begin{equation} | ||
+ | \sum_{k\forall_{m, | ||
+ | \end{equation} | ||
+ | |||
+ | \begin{equation} | ||
+ | \sum_{k\forall_{m, | ||
+ | \end{equation} | ||
+ | |||
+ | \begin{equation} | ||
+ | \sum_{k\forall_{m, | ||
+ | \end{equation} | ||
+ | |||
+ | \begin{equation} | ||
+ | \sum_{k\forall_{m}(TOFAC.LO_m\ge TOFAC.UP_m)} PFAC_{m, | ||
+ | \end{equation} | ||
+ | |||
+ | Define consumer price changes from support points | ||
+ | |||
+ | \begin{equation} | ||
+ | DCP_{m,j} = \sum_{k\forall_{m, | ||
+ | \end{equation} | ||
+ | |||
+ | Of course consumer prices changes are also related to the last simulation result (which is for T+1 due to backward looping) | ||
+ | |||
+ | \begin{equation} | ||
+ | DCP_{m,j} =UVAD_{m, | ||
+ | \end{equation} | ||
+ | |||
+ | Define consumer prices from support points and probabilities | ||
+ | |||
+ | \begin{equation} | ||
+ | CP_{m,j} = \sum_{k\forall_{m, | ||
+ | \end{equation} | ||
+ | |||
+ | Define group expenditure from support points and probabilities | ||
+ | |||
+ | \begin{equation} | ||
+ | EX_{m, | ||
+ | \end{equation} | ||
+ | |||
+ | Define total expenditure slack from support points and probabilities | ||
+ | |||
+ | \begin{equation} | ||
+ | TOFAC_m=\sum_{k\forall_{m}(TOFAC.LO_m\ge TOFAC.UP_m)} PFAC_{m, | ||
+ | \end{equation} | ||
+ | |||
+ | Exhaustion of food expenditure may be relaxed with a slack factor different from one. However, this “last resort” to achieve feasibility in the expenditure allocation problem is limited to years and countries with precarious data and subject to strong penalties. | ||
+ | |||
+ | \begin{equation} | ||
+ | \sum_{FOPOS} EX_{m, | ||
+ | \end{equation} | ||
+ | |||
+ | Consistency of group expenditure | ||
+ | |||
+ | \begin{equation} | ||
+ | EX_{m, | ||
+ | \end{equation} | ||
+ | |||
+ | For most countries the exhaustion of total expenditure is the only evident hard constraint (and even this is relaxed in problem cases). However, as the penalties for group expenditure are set high, and furthermore as the range of expenditure supports defines additional implicit hard constraints, | ||
+ | |||
+ | **Include file // | ||
+ | |||
+ | The initialisation, | ||
+ | |||
+ | * The initialisation tries to ensure positive consumer margins by the assignments of expected values and by specifying bounds on estimated consumer prices. The reference point for these margins is an average of EU and national prices that reflects the importance of domestic sales vs. imports. | ||
+ | * Bounds and spread of supports around expected consumer prices are set high for items without ILO style prices (say “table olives” TABO) or where the fit of available price information is questionable (e.g. cabbage prices for “OVEG”). | ||
+ | * A checking parameter (“p_checks”) permits to check the iniitalisation in case of infeasibilites. The most frequent case observed in the last years is that lower bounds on oils expenditure become binding, suggesting the need for some systematic mismatch of price and expenditure information for this group. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ====COCO2: Final completions==== |
the_complete_and_consistent_data_base_coco_for_the_national_scale.txt · Last modified: 2022/11/07 10:23 by 127.0.0.1