Skip to main content

The Official Journal of the Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS)

Table 4 Comparison of results between our original MRIO tables and the METI table (in %)

From: Carbon footprint analysis through constructing a multi-region input–output table: a case study of Japan

 

Estimated by the table constructed in this paper

Estimated by the table compiled by METI

Carbon footprint

Induced production

Carbon footprint

Induced production

Hokkaido

1.72

1.13

1.84

1.13

 Including prefecture (1)

Tohoku

7.79

2.61

8.13

2.63

 Including prefectures (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), and (7)

Kanto

62.42

78.25

64.90

80.26

 Including prefectures (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), (13), (14), (15), (19), (20), and (22)

Chubu

6.13

5.03

6.92

5.10

 Including prefectures (16), (17), (21), (23), and (24)

Kinki

8.51

6.92

8.01

5.79

 Including prefectures (18), (25), (26), (27), (28), (29), and (30)

Chugoku

5.44

2.23

4.85

2.17

 Including prefectures (31), (32), (33), (34), and (35)

Shikoku

2.22

1.00

1.68

0.83

 Including prefectures (36), (37), (38), and (39)

Kyushu

5.53

2.71

3.47

2.01

 Including prefectures (40), (41), (42), (43), (44), (45), and (46)

Okinawa

0.23

0.11

0.20

0.09

 Including prefecture (47)

Total (%)

100

100

100

100

Total (1000 t CO2 or billion yen)

130,439

117,219

128,071

118,482

  1. Note: The table shows carbon footprint and induced production derived from total final demand in Tokyo (13)