Servicios Personalizados
Revista
Articulo
Indicadores
- Citado por SciELO
- Accesos
Links relacionados
- Similares en SciELO
Compartir
Problemas del desarrollo
versión impresa ISSN 0301-7036
Prob. Des vol.52 no.205 Ciudad de México abr./jun. 2021 Epub 23-Ago-2021
https://doi.org/10.22201/iiec.20078951e.2021.205.69711
Articles
Social Accounting Matrix: an economic analysis of Mexico
aUniversidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM)-Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas (IIEc), Mexico. Email addresses: neria@unam.mx.
bPhD researcher in economics at UNAM-IIEc, Mexico. Email addresses: raliphat@hotmail.com.
This article illustrates the construction and usefulness of a Social Accounting Matrix (SAM) for Mexico, 2013, presenting the methodology used for its elaboration, as well as its characteristics and qualities as an accounting tool for the evaluation of economic policy linked to the study of economic growth and development. The SAM includes 21 economic sectors, four types of import goods industries, and four institutional sectors subdivided into low-, middle -, and high-income households; financial and non-financial corporations (public and private), government, and the rest of the world. Via inter-institutional analysis, SAMs allow for the detailed observation of the productive structure and the institutional sectors of the Mexican economy.
Keywords: Social Accounting Matrix; economic development; household income-expenditure distribution; industrialization; economic policy
El texto muestra la construcción y utilidad de una Matriz de Contabilidad Social (MCS) para México 2013; presenta la metodología para su elaboración, características y cualidades como herramienta contable para la evaluación de la política económica vinculada al estudio del crecimiento y desarrollo económico. La MCS incluye 21 sectores económicos, cuatro tipos de industrias de bienes de importación y cuatro sectores institucionales subdivididos en hogares de ingreso bajo, medio y alto; así como sociedades financieras y no financieras públicas y privadas, gobierno y resto del mundo. Con una MCS se puede observar a detalle la situación de la estructura productiva y de los sectores institucionales de la economía mexicana a través del análisis interinstitucional.
Palabras clave: Matriz de Contabilidad Social; desarrollo económico; distribución del ingreso-gasto de hogares; industrialización; política económica
Clasificación JEL: E16; O11; O15; E01; E02
1. INTRODUCTION
The Social Accounting Matrix (SAM) is a useful and powerful accounting tool for economic analysis, especially for evaluating economic growth and development. Taking Quesnay's (1894) tables as a reference, Leontief (1941)1developed the idea of economic circular flow, using what he called the Input-Output Matrix (IOM) to analyze economic transactions between an economy’s productive sectors. This matrix provides a detailed picture of the economic relationships of the productive sectors. Subsequently, Stone (1956)2incorporated the institutional sectors into the IOM, which resulted in the now widely-known SAM. In contrast to the analysis with IOM, the use of SAM allows for a specific analysis of the productive sector’s relationship with households, government, societies, and the rest of the world.
The primary objective of this article is to demonstrate the usefulness of a SAM for inter-institutional accounting analysis and its relationship with the development of the Mexican economy. Based on an analysis of the inter-institutional relationships between economic agents, a bridge is drawn between the analysis of income production and distribution, including transactions from the government, corporations, and the rest of the world to households. This article also provides a methodological approach for analyzing the relationship between the SAM and economic development, and combines the available data from the productive sectors and the institutional account system. The SAM-Mexico 2013 presented here includes 21 economic sectors: 4 types of import goods industries; 4 institutional sectors subdivided into households by income level (low, medium, and high); public and private financial and non-financial corporations; government; and rest of the world. A SAM with the aforementioned level of disaggregation has not yet been published. The SAM was compiled using data from the 2013 IOM and the institutional accounts system, as well as data from INEGI's National Household Income and Expenditure Survey (ENIGH) and the balance of payments published by the Bank of Mexico.
This article is structured in five sections, including an introduction. The second section briefly reviews the definition and characteristics of a SAM. The third section then describes the methodology followed to develop the SAM-Mexico 2013, concluding with a presentation of the model. The fourth section goes on to provide a descriptive analysis of the Mexican economy based on the results from the model, which serve as a basis for subsequent inter-institutional analyses, and the final section offers some conclusions.
The SAM-Mexico 2013 constitutes a useful methodological tool for the analysis of economic development in Mexico, due to its level of disaggregation and the data presented. The proposed model will allow for the elaboration and evaluation of public policies that are better focused on addressing not only economic growth, but also the distribution of this growth between the institutional sectors of the economy.
2. DEFINITION AND CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SAM-MEXICO 2013
The elaboration and presentation format of the SAM is based on the System of National Accounts (SNA) methodology (UN, 1993 and 2016) and has a similar structure to that of the SAMs published by the International Labor Organization (ILO], 2019) and the International Food Policy Research Institute (Breisinger et al., 2009). The SAM is an accounting representation of the transactions carried out between the productive and institutional sectors of the economy. Following the double-entry method, a square matrix is obtained in which each accounting record has a row (income) and column (expenditure); the total value of each row is equal to the value obtained in each column; and the total income of each sector is spent (including savings). On the production side, all the goods supplied are demanded by the institutional sectors and there are no inventories (Robinson et al., 2001).
Several SAMs have been developed in Mexico. Banegas and Blancas (2019) analyze the effects of public spending on economic growth and social welfare using an aggregated 2011 SAM; Núñez and Romero (2020), meanwhile, study the effect of increasing private savings and granting subsidies to the consumption of domestic inputs using a 2012 SAM; Casares et al. (2017), for their part, observe the effect of fiscal policy and government transfers on household income using a 2003 SAM that disaggregates the household account by deciles; while Blancas (2010) elaborates an SAM which disaggregates the savings/investment account by the institutional sectors of central, commercial, and development banking, thus allowing for analysis of the relationship between current and capital account flows through what he calls inter-institutional analysis. Meanwhile, Cardona et al. (2018) estimate an SAM to determine an economy’s key productive sectors. Finally, Chapa et al. (2019) use an SAM to evaluate the expected effectiveness of an elderly assistance program. However, these studies do not advance a methodology with which to elaborate an SAM for Mexico using the available data. Therefore, there is a vital need to formulate a coherent and standardized methodology to elaborate an SAM that serves as a tool to analyze the country’s economic development.
The objectives of the SAM-Mexico 2013 are as follows: to shed light on the relationship between the national productive sector and the type of imports; to include the relationship between the productive and institutional sectors; and to disaggregate household income-expenditure into low, medium, and high. The matrix is compiled based on data from the IOM32013 (INEGI, 2018a); the institutional relationships are calculated using the data published in the System of National Accounts-Institutional Sector Accounts (INEGI, 2013b); and the institutional sector of households is constructed using data from the 2014 National Survey of Household Incomes and Expenditures (Encuesta Nacional de Ingresos y Gastos de los Hogares, ENIGH) (INEGI, 2014).4The aforementioned bases group an additional set of official information published by INEGI (2013b and 2014).
Table 1 shows the prototype SAM divided into three quadrants. The first integrates transactions for intermediate consumption, factor income, indirect taxes, and imported inputs; the second includes data on domestic and foreign demand for final goods and services; and the third includes data on inter-institutional transfers.
Intermediate transactions | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
MCS 2013 | A | 211 | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | 521 | 5221 | 5222 | 5223 | 541 | 611 | L | M | N | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | UFOS | T-Income | |
A - Agricultural and nonagricultural primary sector | Quadrant I | Quadrant II | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
211 - Oil and Gas Extraction | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
B - Mining | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
C - Construction and related services | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
D - Food and beverage indutry | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
E - Petroleum products, Chemicals, and plastics | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
F - Mineral and non-metallic industries | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
G - Electrical, electronic, and transportation | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
H - Other insdustries | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I - Groceries, food, beverages, ice, and tobacco trade | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
J - Transportation and warehousing services | Intermediate transactions (intermediate consumption) | Final consumption | Govermment consumption | Exports | Investment | Total demand | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
K - Telecomunications | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
521 - Central Banking | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
522 - Multiple Banking | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
5222 - Economic Development Financial Institutions | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
5223 - Credit Unions and Savings Institutions | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
541 - Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
611 - Educational services | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
L - Medical services and social assistance | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
M - Public sector | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
N - Other services | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
22 | D.1 - Compensation of employers | Factor income | Quadrant III | Factor income | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
23 | Grass operating surplus | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
24 | Net taxes on production | Indirect taxes | Indirect taxes | Indirect taxes | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
25 | MD - Food and beverages industry | Imported inputs | M Final consumption | Govermment imports | Imports of investment goods | Total imports | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
26 | ME - Petroleum products, chemicals, and plastics | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
27 | MG - Manufacture of electrical, electronic, and transport goods | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
28 | M0 - Other imports | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
29 | Households_1 (low income) | Quadrant I | IPF* | Interinstitutional transfers | Institutions | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
30 | Households_2 (middle income) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
31 | Households_3 (high income) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
32 | Public nonfinancial corporations | IPF* | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
33 | Private nonfinancial corporations | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
34 | Financial corporations | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
35 | Govermment | IPF* | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
36 | Rest of the World | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
37 | Savings | Depreciation | Import income | Savings | Savings | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
U | UFOS | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total expenditure | Total supply | Factors | Total imports | Institutions | Investment |
Nota: * Factor payment income.
Source: compiled by the authors based on studies by Blancas (2006 y 2010), Núñez and Romero (2020), Casares et al. (2017) and Cardona et al. (2018).
The institutional sectors included in the SAM-Mexico 2013 are Households, Public and private financial and non-financial corporations, Government, and Rest of the world.5 Table 2 shows the exchanges (income-expenditure) made between the productive and institutional sectors. The difference between income and expenditure of the institutional sectors is considered as savings-investment.
Expenditure | |||||
Revenues | Production sectors | Households | Government | Companies | Rest of the world |
Productive sectors | Intermediate consumption | Consumption of goods and services | Government consumption | X | Exports |
Households | Payment of remunerations and capital services | Transfers between households | Social transfers | Income from dividend payments | Payment of services of the factors of production abroad and transfers |
Government | Taxes on production | Payment of taxes, profits, and duties | Transfers between government entities | Taxes on income and profits | Tariffs on imports and transfers |
Corporations | Gross operating surplus | Adquisition of assets | Capitalization of public companies and transfers to private companies | Intercompany transfers (assets and liabilities) | Purchase of assets or liabilities and reinvestment of earnings in non-residents ' holdings |
Rest of the world | Imports | Payments or transfers | Transfers and payments for services (humanitarian aid, foreign consultancy) | Payment of dividends and decapitalization of companies to non-residents | X |
Source: compiled by the authors.
3. SAM-MEXICO 2013
IOM data in the SAM
The first step in elaborating the SAM consists of incorporating the data from the IOM in quadrant I, which represents the total supply of the economy (intermediate inputs, productive factors, total imports, and direct taxes).
The transactions of the productive sectors are based on IOM data that includes 79 productive subsectors, which are grouped into 21 industries within quadrant I of the SAM (see Table 3). Intermediate inputs in the IOM correspond to the intermediate demand of the productive sectors.
Sector | Production sector (sub-sectors-NAICS) | NAICS code | Production(% GDP) |
Primary | A-Agricultural and non-agricultural primary sector | 111-115 | 3.1 |
211-Oil and gas extraction | 211 | 5.5 | |
B-Mining | 212-213 | 1.6 | |
Secundario | C-Construction and related services | 221-222 y 236-238 | 8.9 |
D-Food and beverage industry | 311-312 | 4.6 | |
E-Petroleum products, chemicals, and plastics | 324-326 | 2.6 | |
F-Mineral and non-metalic industries | 327, 331-332 | 2.0 | |
G-Electrical, electronic, and transportation goods manufacturing | 333-336 | 4.9 | |
H-Other industries | 31 3-31 6, 321-323, 337 y 339 | 1.8 | |
Tertiary (services) | I-Grocery, food, beverages, ice, and tobacco trade | 431 y 461 | 16.8 |
J-Transportation and warehousing services | 481-488 y 491-493 | 6.1 | |
K-Telecomunications | 511-512, 515 y 517-519 | 2.0 | |
541-Professional, scientific, and technical services | 541 | 1.9 | |
611-Educational services | 611 | 4.1 | |
L-Medical services and social assistance | 621-624 | 2.4 | |
M-Public sector | 813 y 931 | 4.6 | |
N-Other services | 5224-5225, 523-524, 531- 533, 551, 561-562, 71 1-713, 721-722, 81 1-81 2 y 814 | 20.9 | |
Tertiary (financial) | 521-Central banking | 521 | 0.1 |
5221-Multiple banks | 5221 | 1.8 | |
5222-Economic development financial institutions | 5222 | 0.3 | |
5223-Credit Unions and Savings Institutions | 5223 | 0.2 |
Source: Compiled by the authors using data from SCIAN (INEGI, 2013a) and MIP (INEGI, 2018a).
The factors of production are labor and capital available for the production of goods and services. The income/payment to the factors of production (FPI-lines 22 and 23) is divided into employee remuneration (W) and Gross Operating Surplus (EBO):
Data on imports is obtained from the IOM of imported goods and services by productive sector. The SAM-Mexico 2013 disaggregates imports from the rest of the world account. Blancas (2006) performs a similar procedure when he disaggregates the savings-financial account to analyze the relationship between the financial sector and the real economy.
The IOM disaggregated by imported requirements makes it possible to identify the demand for imports. Table 4 disaggregates imports into four categories: the first three account for more than 92% of total imports and, because of their high household demand, MD-Food and beverage industries is included.
Industries | NAICS | Imports (% total) |
MD-Food and beverage industry | 311 and 312 | 4.34 |
ME-Petroleum products, chemicals, and plastics | 324, 325 and 326 | 21.85 |
MG-Manufacturing of electrical, electronic, and transportation goods | 333, 334, 335 and 336 | 66.44 |
M0-Other imports | NA | 7.37 |
Source: compiled by the authors using data from INEGI (2013a).
Total imports are integrated into the SAM as the sum of imports by type of demand: imported intermediate goods (MInt), households (MCons), government (MGob), and investment or gross fixed capital formation (MFBKF).
The sum of the four types of imports equals the income in the rest of the world account. To comply with the double-entry income-expenditure accounting rule, the imports account balances with income from imports for the rest of the world (see Table 3, row 36, columns 25-28).
Taxes and subsidies on production and imports recorded in the IOM correspond to indirect taxes (INEGI, 2018a); in the SAM they are included as Net taxes on production (line 24).
The sum of intermediate transactions, factor income, input imports, and indirect taxes represents the total supply of the economy (see equation 3).
Quadrant II integrates the intermediate consumption of the productive sectors (inputs), household demand, government, exports, and gross fixed capital formation (GFCF). Stock changes are values that are not reported in the IOM6and are included within the SAM as UFOS (line/column 38).
Adding intermediate demand with demand by institutional sectors and investment (FBKF) gives final demand by productive sector. The sum of final demand by productive sector represents the national aggregate demand.
Additionally, it is demonstrated that total supply equals total demand accounting identity or equilibrium condition:
Data from the Institutional Accounts System in the Sam
To determine the values of quadrant III, the monetary transfers made between institutional sectors are disaggregated using the Institutional Sectors Account (ISA) database.
The first step consists of transforming the total payment of productive factors into the income of the institutional sectors (line/columns 22 and 23). Remuneration payments (W) are obtained from the ISA as D.1- Employee remuneration and includes sub-accounts D.11-Wages and salaries and D.12-Employers' social contributions; the data is recorded in the SAM as household income (lines 29-31).
The payment to subaccounts B.2b-Gross operating surplus (EBO) and B.3b-Gross mixed-income is distributed among all institutional sectors and depreciation (see information in Table 5). The sum of EBO and salaries reported in the ISA is equal to the value reported in the IOM.
Institutional sector |
B.2b-Gross operating surplus |
P.51c1-Consumption of fixed capital over gross operating surplus |
B.2n-Net operating surplus |
S.11001-Public Non-Financial Corporations | 1 222276 | 477211 | 745 065 |
S.1 1002,03-Private non-financial corporationsa | 4 416 063 | 1 388378 | 3 027 685 |
S.12-Financial corporations | 397751 | 22 402 | 375 349 |
S.13-General Government | 8 657 | 8 657 | 0 |
S.14-Householdsb c | 4 967 600 | 670 582 | 4 297 018 |
S.2-Rest of the World | NA | NA | NA |
Notes: a S.1 1002 and S.1 1003-Domestic and foreign-controlled private non-financial coporations; b Includes B.3b-Gross mixed-income, P.51c2-Fixed capital consumption over gross mixed-income and B.3n-Net mixed-income; c Includes S.15-Non-profit institutions serving households (NPISHs); NA: Not Applicable. Source: compiled by the authors using data from INEGI, 2013b.
The Net taxes on the production account (line 24) includes indirect taxes paid by households such as Value Added Tax (VAT) and taxes on exports and investment; the total value is transferred to the government as revenue (line 35/column 24).
The gross value added generated in the economy is transferred to the institutional sectors as remuneration payments, net taxes on production, and gross operating surplus (columns 22-24). Similarly, the depreciation payment is subtracted from the EBO and transferred to the savings account (line 33).
The next step in the construction of the SAM is to transfer the payment for imports of intermediate, capital, and consumption inputs from the productive sector, households, government, and investment (lines 24-27) to the rest of the world account (line 38/columns 24-27).
Registering import payments by residents to the rest of the world concludes the exchanges between the productive sector and the institutional sectors; additionally, the data from the IOM was incorporated into the SAM via the ICS. The structuring of the data ensures that the SAM is squared and that the sum of the grand total of the columns and rows is equal.
Institutional transfers matrix
Finally, the Institutional Transfers Matrix (ITM) is contained in quadrant III. This matrix is constructed by aggregating the inter-institutional exchanges reported in section II-Income Distribution and Utilization Account and subsection II.1.2-Primary Income Allocation Account of the ISA. Exchanges are also recorded for D.4-Property income, D.5-Current taxes on income, wealth, etc., and D.7-Other current transfers.
The method used to estimate payments between institutional sectors consists of identifying their transactions with the rest of the sectors. To determine each transaction, the ICS is disaggregated at the institutional subsector level and the subaccounts at the highest level of disaggregation. As an example of how each transfer from the ICS is recorded, Table 6 shows the transfers from sub-account D.5-Current taxes on income, wealth, etc., and shows that the institutional sectors transfer resources to sector S.13-General government for current taxes.
Institucional sector | U-Uses | R-Resources |
S.11001-Public Non-Financial Corporations | 10 642 | |
S.1 1002,03-Private non-financial corporationsa | 466 955 | |
S.12- Financial corporations | 28 342 | |
S.13- General Government | 1 062 905 | |
S.14- Householdsb | 556 966 | |
S.2-Rest of the World | NA | NA |
Total | 1 062 905 | 1 062 905 |
Notes: a S.1 1002 and S.1 1003-Domestic and foreign-controlled private nonfinancial corporations; b Includes a las S.1-Nonprofit institutions serving households (NPISHs); NA: Not Applicable. Rounded figures. Source: compiled by the authors using data from INEGI, 2013b.
The exchanges of account D.5 are presented in a matrix form in Table 7. This submatrix is an example of the set of sub-matrices that make up the ITM.
S.11001 | S.11002,03 | S.12 | S.13 | S.14 | S.2 | Total | |
S.11001-Public Non-Financial Corporations | |||||||
S.11002,03-Private non-financial corporations | |||||||
S.12- Financial corporations | |||||||
S.13- General government | 10 642 | 466 955 | 28 342 | 556 966 | 1 062 905 | ||
5.14- Households | |||||||
S.2-Rest of the World | |||||||
Total | 10 642 | 466 955 | 28 342 | 556 966 | 1 062 905 |
Note: Figures rounded.
Source: compiled by the authors using data from Tabla 6.
The ITM is concluded by summing the information from each submatrix (see Table 8), which contains the information required in quadrant III of the SAM.
Sector institucional | S.11001 | S.11002,03 | S.12 | S.13 | S.14 | S.2 | Total |
S.11001-Public Non-Financial Corporations | 836 | 9 988 | 6 633 | 8 015 | 4 159 | 563 | 30 195 |
S.11002,03-Private non-financial corporations | 6 971 | 83 284 | 98 562 | 40 586 | 114176 | 55 775 | 399 353 |
S.12-Financial corporations | 25 630 | 292 938 | 180 930 | 162 800 | 386 054 | 43 159 | 1 091 511 |
S.13-General government* | 886 549 | 653 499 | 68 012 | 2 244 131 | 972 079 | 1 698 | 4825 968 |
S.14-Households | 14 786 | 2 672 026 | 318 587 | 1 357046 | 31 919 | 344 070 | 4 738 433 |
S.2-Rest of the World | 24 320 | 412 414 | 66 469 | 143 225 | 12 841 | 0 | 659 269 |
Total | 959 092 | 4 124 148 | 739 192 | 3 955 804 | 1 521 228 | 445 264 | 11 744 729 |
Notes: S.1 1002 and S.1 1003-Domestic and foreign-controlled private nonfinancial corporations; Includes S.15-Nonprofit institutions serving households (NPISHs). Rounded figures. *In the general government account (income) a value outside the matrix of 3 974. This data is reported by INEGI in sub-account D.7-Other current transfers.
Source: compiled by the authors using data from INEGI (2013b) and Banco de México (2013).
Disaggregation of the household account
According to Cortés (2018) and Nava and Brown (2018), income distribution problems persist in Mexico, so considering only one type of household would imply an understanding of households as homogeneous. Following the methodology of Blancas (2006 and 2010) and Casares et al. (2017), this article disaggregates the institutional sector of households into the following three groups: low-income (deciles I-IV), middle-income (V-VIII), and high-income (IX-X). To disaggregate the household account, the composition of income/expenditure by decile from the ENIGH 2014 (INEGI, 2014) is taken as a reference. This article then goes on to adopt a classification technique similar to the one presented by Leyva (2004, p. 30).
Disaggregating the household account is crucial to understanding the distribution of household income-expenditure and its relationship with economic development. Various current studies address the problem of homogenization and the use of data on income distribution. One such study is Bustos and Leyva (2017), which illustrates the discrepancies in the measurement of income distribution on the national accounts side with respect to the ENIGH, even pointing to a possible problem of underestimation for some data. The authors decided to take the ENIGH data as a reference because the estimation of household income on the national accounts side focuses on the construction of macroeconomic aggregates, while the survey has a marked use for recognizing the distribution of income among households (Villatoro, 2015, p. 11). For this reason, data by household income decile from the ENIGH-2014 is used to form three groups of households (low, middle, and high) by grouping the survey deciles by household type (see Table 9). It is important to note that "low-income" households have a negative balance of their current income-expenditure, so the SAM-Mexico 2013 reflects negative savings in this group.
Deciles | % of households | Total current income | Total current expenditure | Balance |
I to IV | 19.2 | 183 027 | 209831 | -26 804 |
V to VIII | 36.1 | 432 166 | 394 935 | 37 230 |
IX to X | 44.8 | 642 752 | 490 520 | 152 232 |
Source: compiled by the authors using data from ENIGH, 2014.
The disaggregation by low-, middle- and high-income household in the SAM is resolved by multiplying the income/expenditure values of the household account by the percentage of income/expenditure reported in the ENIGH; the percentage composition of household expenditure is taken and integrated with the absolute value of the income/expenditure of the SAM household account.
With the 2014 ENIGH tabulations, the data on income by household type is integrated with the resource transfers received by households from the rest of the institutional sectors (see Table 10); proxies are constructed from the values reported in the ENIGH that are included within the SAM. For example, the payment of remunerations recorded in the SAM-Mexico 2013 corresponds in the ENIGH to household income from Remunerations from subordinate work, Income from self-employment, and Income from other work. Therefore, the proportion of this income concentrated in deciles I to IV (11.23%) is a proxy for the proportion of income from Remuneration Payments of Low-income Households (row 25/column 22). Leyva (2004, p. 30) performs a similar estimation to adjust the national accounts data with the ENIGH.
Institutional transfers | Proxy ENIGH | % of income by household group | |||
Low | Medium | High | Total (%) | ||
Remuneration payments | Compesation for subordinate employmenta | 11.23 | 34.53 | 54.24 | 100 |
Income from self-employmenta | |||||
Income from other workb | |||||
Gross operating surplus | Income from cooperatives, partnerships, and companies operating as partnershipsc | 1.73 | 6.77 | 91.50 | 100 |
Transfers from companies | Income from property | 18.38 | 29.39 | 52.23 | 100 |
Donations in money from institutions and other households | |||||
Other current income | |||||
Transfers in kind from institutions | |||||
Transfers from government | Retirements, pensions, and indemnities for work-related accidents, dismissal, and voluntary retirement | 18.91 | 29.51 | 51.57 | 100 |
Scholarships from government and institutions | |||||
Benefits from government programs | |||||
Transfers in kind from intitutions | |||||
Transfers from the rest of the world | Income from other countries | 31.10 | 39.53 | 29.36 | 100 |
Household transfers | Donations in money from institutions and other households | 22.33 | 36.82 | 40.86 | 100 |
Current income from self-consumption | |||||
In-kind transfers from others households | |||||
Estimated housing rent |
Notes: aIncludes only income from main and secondary work; b Includes income from jobs 3 to 7 and income obtained in the reference period from other work performed outside the period; c Includes earnings and profits from incorporated companies, cooperatives, and quasi-corporations. Source: compiled by the authors using data from ENIGH, 2014.
The estimation of expenditures by type of household follows the same breakdown as for income (see Table 11). Four groups are considered: Expenditure on domestic final consumption goods, Imports of final consumption goods, Payment of indirect taxes, and Transfers to the rest of the institutional sectors that represent proxies of the expenditure of the household account of the SAM.
Final consumption | ENIGH Proxy | % of expenditure by type of household | |||
Low | Medium | High | Total (%) | ||
A-Agricultural and non-agricultural primary sector | Food, beverages, and tobacco (ABT) | 25.20 | 40.47 | 34.33 | 100 |
211-Oil and gas extraction | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
B-Mining | Total household expenditures on consumer goods (GTHBC) | 18.41 | 35.23 | 46.37 | 100 |
C-Construction and related services | Services and materials for repair, maintenance, and/or expansion of housing | 14.37 | 26.00 | 59.63 | 100 |
D-Food and beverage industry | ABT | 25.20 | 40.47 | 34.33 | 100 |
E-Petroleum products, chemicals, and plastics | Housing, maintenance services, electric power, and fuels. Items and services for cleaning, care of the house, household goods and furniture, glassware, household utensils, and white goods | 21.23 | 37.53 | 41.24 | 100 |
F-Mineral and non-metallic industries | GTHBC | 18.41 | 35.23 | 46.37 | 100 |
G-Manufacture of electrical, electronic, and transport goods | Transportation; vehicle procurement, maintenance, accesories, and services; communications (TAMASVC) | 13.82 | 36.60 | 49.58 | 100 |
H-Other industries | GTHBC | 18.41 | 35.23 | 46.37 | 100 |
I-Grocery, food, beverages, ice, and tobacco trade | ABT | 25.20 | 40.47 | 34.33 | 100 |
J-Transportation and warehousing services | TAMASVC | 13.82 | 36.60 | 49.58 | 100 |
K-Telecommunications | GTHBC | 18.41 | 35.23 | 46.37 | 100 |
521-Central Banking | NA | NA | |||
5221-Multiple Banking | Payment by credit card to the bank or commercial house | 2.12 | 14.21 | 83.67 | 100 |
5222-Economic development financial institutions | Deposit in savings account, savings accounts, savings banks, etc. | 8.55 | 18.21 | 73.24 | 100 |
5223-Credit unions and financial institutions | Deposit in savings accounts, savings, savings bank, etc. | 8.55 | 18.21 | 73.24 | 100 |
541-Professional, scientific and technical services | GTHBC | 18.41 | 35.23 | 46.37 | 100 |
611-Educational services | Education services, educational items, recreational items, and other recreational expenses | 11.27 | 28.28 | 60.45 | 100 |
L-Medical services and social assistance | Health care | 17.12 | 27.94 | 54.95 | 100 |
M-Public sector | GTHBC | 18.41 | 35.23 | 46.37 | 100 |
N-Other services | GTHBC | 18.41 | 35.23 | 46.37 | 100 |
Imports of final consumer goods | |||||
Type of imported goods | ENIGH Proxy | Low | Medium | High | Total |
MD-Food and beverage industry | ABT | 25.20 | 40.47 | 34.33 | 100 |
ME-Petroleum products, chemicals, and plastics | Housing, utilities, electric power, and fuels | 21.23 | 37.53 | 41.24 | 100 |
MG-Manufacturing of electrical, electronic, and transportation goods | TAMASVC | 13.82 | 36.60 | 49.58 | 100 |
M0-Other imports | GTHBC | 18.41 | 35.23 | 46.37 | 100 |
Excise taxes | |||||
Payment of taxes | GTHBC | 18.41 | 35.23 | 46.37 | 100 |
Inter-institutional transfers | |||||
Institutional transfers | Expense transfers | 8.42 | 28.57 | 63.01 | 100 |
Nota: NA: Not Applicable.
Source: compiled by the authors using data from ENIGH, 2014.
Tables 10 and 11 complete the information necessary to conclude the SAM-Mexico 2013 (see Table 12).
Productive sectors | ||||||||||||||
SP1 | SP2 | SP3 | SP4 | SP5 | SP6 | SP7 | SP8 | SP9 | SP10 | SP11 | SP12 | SP13 | ||
A - Agricultural and non-agricultural primary sector | 64 377 | 0.52 | 0.34 | 302 | 393 558 | 7 062 | 103 | 2.04 | 19 349 | 1.72 | 2.18 | 1.95 | ||
211 - Oil and gas extraction | 82 | 494 197 | ||||||||||||
B - Mining | 784 | 351 | 6 670 | 36 292 | 2 278 | 7 140 | 162572 | 714 | 239 | 188 | 182 | 162 | ||
C - Construction and related services | 13 476 | 3 437 | 24 921 | 165 761 | 33 108 | 23 602 | 45 833 | 35 555 | 25 170 | 45 338 | 13 106 | 4 405 | 75 | |
D - Food and beverage industry | 67 660 | 25 | 19 | 235 | 174 159 | 1 629 | 185 | 222 | 5 506 | 2 481 | 100 | 98 | 13 | |
E - Petroleum products, chemicals, and plastics | 38 152 | 28 639 | 41 350 | 152574 | 57 056 | 220 559 | 27 492 | 65 066 | 45 274 | 61 292 | 248 270 | 2 927 | 5 | |
F - Mineral and non-metallic industries | 1 897 | 3 199 | 7 078 | 189 411 | 23 046 | 11 336 | 171 842 | 200 190 | 11 630 | 7 645 | 1 386 | 2 094 | 6 | |
G - Electrical, electronic and transportation manufacturing | 2 046 | 770 | 3 885 | 28 588 | 2 254 | 2 314 | 4 523 | 189257 | 3 414 | 8 218 | 15 380 | 9 028 | 4 | |
H - Other industries | 2 262 | 939 | 3 531 | 21 505 | 14 851 | 12 842 | 9 471 | 32 683 | 123 517 | 32 166 | 2 010 | 755 | 1 274 | |
I - Grocery, food, beverages, ice, and tobacco trade | 44 348 | 11 465 | 15 058 | 137 531 | 173 396 | 122685 | 101 334 | 268 345 | 76 152 | 37 102 | 47 726 | 14 770 | 528 | |
J - Transportation and warehousing services | 6 188 | 5 170 | 2 914 | 29 591 | 29 105 | 47 382 | 18 809 | 54 908 | 11 822 | 51 426 | 62 549 | 8 126 | 102 | |
K - Telecomunications | 363 | 1 398 | 1 013 | 24 382 | 10 820 | 6 138 | 6 548 | 24 038 | 5 514 | 22 971 | 11 629 | 24 732 | 12 | |
521 - Central Banking | ||||||||||||||
522 - Multiple banking | 1 398 | 10 | 1 064 | 14 532 | 3 427 | 2 374 | 2 782 | 2 528 | 1 430 | 14 722 | 1 189 | 1 630 | 57 | |
5222 - Economic Development financial institutions | 31 | 106 | 214 | 2 354 | 40 | 129 | 130 | 199 | 11 | 345 | 33 | 1.47 | ||
5223 - Credit Unions and Savings Institutions | 61 | 16 | 27 | 71 | 19 | 86 | 12 | 16 | 304 | 23 | 0.55 | |||
541 - Professional, scientific, and technical services | 605 | 18 655 | 10 002 | 25 367 | 15 890 | 19 767 | 9 740 | 28 739 | 7 090 | 20 334 | 9 277 | 14 046 | 204 | |
611 - Educational services | 1.23 | 5 | 1.97 | 14 | 63 | 78 | 9 | 336 | 16 | 101 | 18 | 21 | 0.37 | |
L - Medical services and social assistance | 5 | 12 | 11 | 23 | 36 | 27 | 21 | 61 | 172 | 65 | 106 | 30 | 0.04 | |
M - Public sector | 20 | 13 | 58 | 988 | 390 | 266 | 215 | 345 | 599 | 1 076 | 810 | 848 | ||
N - Other services | 4 030 | 28 499 | 27 570 | 60 552 | 60 278 | 84 342 | 44 314 | 114106 | 40 564 | 254 425 | 116894 | 76 512 | 101 | |
W | D.1 - Remuneration of employers | 87 476 | 34 803 | 37 008 | 444 846 | 96 261 | 107 588 | 69 974 | 277 769 | 127324 | 417 291 | 304 755 | 55 149 | 2 044 |
K | Gross operating surplus | 423 414 | 857 768 | 222 962 | 1 002 718 | 637 071 | 301 015 | 257 929 | 508 935 | 160 621 | 2 309 816 | 708 515 | 268 289 | 13 834 |
TY | Net taxes on production | -4 148 | -609 | -2 323 | -4 156 | 11 492 | 7 081 | 2 980 | 13 567 | 2 945 | 13 068 | -24 913 | 1 345 | 58 |
M1 | MD - Food and beverage industry | 9 228 | 130 | 90 | 24 | 57 572 | 7 206 | 74 | 167 | 1 742 | 562 | 6 | 0.96 | 0.00 |
M2 | ME - Petroleum products, chemicals, and plastics | 26 547 | 26 590 | 6 899 | 23 258 | 32 517 | 571 835 | 22 912 | 121 879 | 49 751 | 20 340 | 73 019 | 1 531 | 0.14 |
M3 | MG - Manufacture of electrical, electronic, and transport goods | 2 543 | 7 334 | 14 502 | 80 041 | 11 686 | 19 802 | 32 168 | 1 306 158 | 48 293 | 31 870 | 78 627 | 57 892 | 0.23 |
M4 | M0 - Other imports | 17 945 | 4 252 | 12 125 | 113 718 | 99 921 | 27 926 | 136452 | 294 153 | 154886 | 32 318 | 23 588 | 6 185 | 55 |
H1 | Households_1 (low income) | |||||||||||||
H2 | Households_2 (middle income) | |||||||||||||
H3 | Households_3 (high income) | |||||||||||||
S1 | Public non-financial corporations | |||||||||||||
S2 | Private non-financial corporations | |||||||||||||
S3 | Financial corporations | |||||||||||||
G | Government | |||||||||||||
RM | R.M Rest of the world | |||||||||||||
S | Savings UFOS |
|||||||||||||
Total expenditure | 810 711 | 1 032 962 | 436 639 | 2 550 560 | 1 940 345 | 2106340 | 1 128497 | 3 539 933 | 923 046 | 3 385 466 | 1 694 287 | 550 578 | 18 371 | |
SP14 | SP15 | SP16 | SP17 | SP18 | SP19 | SP20 | SP21 | W | K | TY | M1 | M2 | ||
Productive sectors | ||||||||||||||
A - Agricultural and non-agricultural primary sector | 0.75 | 421 | 64 | 18 | 4 671 | |||||||||
211 - Oil and gas extraction | ||||||||||||||
B - Mining | 65 | 21 | 62 | 51 | 544 | |||||||||
C - Construction and related services | 1 332 | 185 | 802 | 7 218 | 1 5 240 | 12 843 | 22 161 | 47 588 | ||||||
D - Food and beverage industry | 47 | 23 | 3 | 170 | 1 153 | 2 026 | 7 369 | 38 378 | ||||||
E - Petroleum products, chemicals, and plastics | 226 | 67 | 846 | 7 503 | 2 627 | 49 801 | 20 209 | 51 825 | ||||||
F - Mineral and non metallic industries | 62 | 18 | 5 | 619 | 176 | 147 | 722 | 12 560 | ||||||
G - Electrical, electronic, and transportation manufacturing | 70 | 13 | 4 | 530 | 231 | 610 | 727 | 19 405 | ||||||
H - Other industries | 4 486 | 245 | 94 | 4 229 | 3 116 | 11 009 | 9 250 | 26 498 | ||||||
I - Grocery, food, beverages, ice, and tobacco trade | 2 527 | 195 | 186 | 6 621 | 5 234 | 29 264 | 13 579 | 61 316 | ||||||
J - Transportation and warehousing services | 1 996 | 1 178 | 41 | 5 583 | 3 974 | 5 706 | 10 508 | 24 347 | ||||||
K - Telecomunications | 3 708 | 729 | 899 | 11 363 | 6 627 | 5 266 | 27 281 | 32 203 | ||||||
521 - Central banking | 10 726 | 3 579 | ||||||||||||
522 - Multiple banking | 1 002 | 115 | 1 109 | 647 | 573 | 11 572 | 1 9 020 | |||||||
5222 - Economic Development financial institutions | 414 | 39 | 9 | 33 | 3 307 | 1 429 | ||||||||
5223 - Credit Unions and Savings Institutions | 0.85 | 0.04 | 0.01 | 2.30 | ||||||||||
541 - Professional, scientific, and technical services | 10 722 | 3 701 | 2 880 | 8 609 | 6 589 | 10 986 | 44 587 | 92 424 | ||||||
611 - Educational services | 34 | 41 | 2.08 | 123 | 1 413 | 188 | 3 064 | 291 | ||||||
L - Medical services and social assistance | 12 | 0.89 | 0.61 | 25 | 9 | 5 368 | 39 | 106 | ||||||
M - Public sector | 984 | 135 | 0 | 1 214 | 0.77 | 0.18 | 6 | 2 531 | ||||||
N - Other services | 68 397 | 2 694 | 1 025 | 50 322 | 17 927 | 30 778 | 59 719 | 262 589 | ||||||
W | D.1 - Remuneration of employers | 88 526 | 10 458 | 3 225 | 96 235 | 593 349 | 297 733 | 674 744 | 71 6 295 | |||||
K | Gross operating surplus | 199 071 | 42 023 | 34 118 | 214 985 | 69 403 | 75 139 | 30 804 | 2 673 915 | |||||
TY | Net taxes on production | 10 721 | 568 | -55 | 943 | 6 227 | 13 413 | 39 855 | 8 819 | |||||
M1 | MD - Food and beverages industry | 0.06 | 0.08 | 0.09 | 6 | 90 | 771 | 2 069 | 7 034 | |||||
M2 | ME - Petroleum products, chemicals, and plastics | 35 | 14 | 33 | 1 072 | 1 869 | 16 185 | 6 681 | 23 039 | |||||
M3 | MG - Manufacture of electrical, electronic, and transport goods | 245 | 14 | 49 | 7 592 | 3 614 | 2 915 | 7 052 | 39 295 | |||||
M4 | M0 - Other imports | 1 615 | 743 | 683 | 4 629 | 8 963 | 13 190 | 14 734 | 66 337 | |||||
H1 | Households_1 (low income) | 511 565 | 74 265 | |||||||||||
H2 | Households_2 (middle income) | 1 572 433 | 290 782 | |||||||||||
H3 | Households_3 (high income) | 2 470 172 | 3 931 971 | |||||||||||
S1 | Public non-financial corporations | 745 065 | ||||||||||||
S2 | Private non-financial corporations | 3 027 685 | ||||||||||||
S3 | Financial corporations | 375 349 | ||||||||||||
G | Government | 721 986 | ||||||||||||
RM | RM Rest of the world | 224 188 | 1 123 794 | |||||||||||
S | S Savings | 2 567 230 | ||||||||||||
UFOS | ||||||||||||||
Total expenditure | 405 957 | 67 665 | 44 963 | 430 799 | 748 921 | 584 039 | 1 010 109 | 4 232 463 | 4 554 170 | 11 012 348 | 721 986 | 224 188 | 1 123 794 | |
M3 | M4 | H1 | H2 | H3 | S1 | S2 | S3 | G | RM | I | UFOS | TI | ||
Productive sectors | ||||||||||||||
A - Agricultural and non-agricultural primary sector | 34 552 | 55 485 | 47 067 | 110 404 | 49 224 | 24 045 | 810 711 | |||||||
211 - Oil and gas extraction | 539 826 | -1 143 | 1 032 962 | |||||||||||
B - Mining | 939 | 1 797 | 2 365 | 44 129 | 166 771 | 2 323 | 436 639 | |||||||
C - Construction and related services | 16 694 | 30 196 | 69 262 | 9 268 | 4 662 | 1 879 322 | 0 | 2 550 560 | ||||||
D - Food and beverage industry | 370 724 | 595 320 | 505 006 | 148 335 | 2 089 | 1 7 368 | 1 940 345 | |||||||
E - Petroleum products, chemicals, and plastics | 126355 | 220 823 | 320 491 | 293 354 | 1 962 | 21 598 | 2 106 340 | |||||||
F - Mineral and non-metallic industries | 14 510 | 27 768 | 36 552 | 348 481 | 53 971 | 2 148 | 1 128 497 | |||||||
G - Electrical, electronic, and transportation manufacturing | 101 219 | 268 009 | 363 006 | 2 538 103 | 302 942 | -324 617 | 3 539 933 | |||||||
H - Other industries | 61 073 | 116 881 | 153853 | 2 796 | 249 400 | 26 683 | -4 373 | 923 046 | ||||||
I - Grocery, food, beverages, ice, and tobacco trade | 375 627 | 603 193 | 511 685 | 468 493 | 256 911 | 197 | 3 385 466 | |||||||
J - Transportation and warehousing services | 148 209 | 392 430 | 531 529 | 129509 | 111 184 | 1 694 287 | ||||||||
K - Telecomunications | 57 501 | 110044 | 144854 | 622 | 2 549 | 7 375 | 550 578 | |||||||
521 - Central Banking | 4 066 | 18 371 | ||||||||||||
522 - Multiple banking | 6 849 | 45 929 | 270 399 | 1 602 | 405 957 | |||||||||
5222 - Economic Development financial institutions | 5 031 | 10 715 | 43 094 | 67 665 | ||||||||||
5223 - Credit Unions and Savings Institutions | 3 790 | 8 072 | 32 463 | 44 963 | ||||||||||
541 - Professional, scientific, and technical services | 8 506 | 16 279 | 21 429 | 20 303 | 1 241 | 2 827 | 430 799 | |||||||
611 - Educational services | 18 404 | 46 163 | 98 692 | 579 469 | 371 | 748 921 | ||||||||
L - Medical services and social assistance | 27 779 | 45 337 | 89 171 | 413 987 | 1 634 | 584 039 | ||||||||
M - Public sector | 9 858 | 18 866 | 24 834 | 945 847 | 205 | 1 010 109 | ||||||||
N - Other services | 508 531 | 973 219 | 1 281 073 | 9 696 | 35 789 | 18 517 | 4 232 463 | |||||||
W | D.1 - Remuneration of employers | 11 316 | 4 554 1 70 | |||||||||||
K | Gross operating surplus | 11 012 348 | ||||||||||||
TY | Net taxes on production | 111 992 | 214 328 | 282 126 | 0.57 | 1 6 662 | 721 986 | |||||||
M1 | MD - Food and beverage industry | 34 613 | 55 583 | 47 151 | 68 | 224188 | ||||||||
M2 | ME - Petroleum products, chemicals, and plastics | 19 235 | 33 996 | 37 357 | 7 202 | 1 123794 | ||||||||
M3 | MG - Manufacture of electrical, electronic, and transport goods | 33 170 | 87 828 | 118959 | 464 062 | 2 455 708 | ||||||||
M4 | M0 - Other imports | 22 912 | 43 848 | 57 718 | 66 431 | 219 762 | 1 445089 | |||||||
H1 | Households_1 (low income) | 600 | 2 036 | 4 491 | 2 717 | 491 070 | 58 550 | 256 670 | 107 019 | 1 508 983 | ||||
H2 | Households_2 (middle income) | 989 | 3 358 | 7 405 | 4 346 | 785 380 | 93 641 | 400 494 | 136 016 | 3 294 843 | ||||
H3 | Households_3 (high income) | 1 098 | 3 726 | 8 218 | 7 722 | 1 395575 | 166395 | 699 882 | 101 035 | 8 785 795 | ||||
S1 | Public non-financial corporations | 350 | 1 188 | 2 621 | 836 | 9 988 | 6 633 | 8 015 | 563 | 775 260 | ||||
S2 | Private non-financial corporations | 9 610 | 32 622 | 71 944 | 6 971 | 83 284 | 98 562 | 40 586 | 55 775 | 3427038 | ||||
S3 | Financial corporations | 32 492 | 110303 | 243 259 | 25 630 | 292 938 | 180 930 | 162800 | 43 159 | 1 466860 | ||||
G | G Government | 81 814 | 277 741 | 612 524 | 886 549 | 653 499 | 68 012 | 2 244 131 | 1 698 | 3 974 | 5 551 928 | |||
RM | RM Rest of the world | 2 455 708 | 1 445089 | 1 081 | 3 669 | 8 091 | 24 320 | 412 414 | 66 469 | 143 225 | 5 908 049 | |||
S | S Savings | -2 377 676 | 289 346 | 3 595 612 | -184 209 | -696 733 | 469 526 | -388 291 | 386 484 | 3 661 290 | ||||
UFOS | -1 639 | 152 152 | 152 152 | |||||||||||
Total expenditure | 2 455 708 | 1 445 089 | -131 571 | 4 746 099 | 9 644 299 | 774 883 | 3 427 416 | 1 208 719 | 5 551 928 | 5 911 094 | 3 436 410 | -37 079 |
Source: compiled by the authors using data from INEGI, based on Blancas (2006 y 2010), Núñez y Romero (2020), Casares et al. (2017) y Cardona et al. (2018).
The robustness of the matrix’s findings becomes clear when the economic aggregates from the SAM-Mexico 2013 are compared against data from the National Accounts (see Table 13).
Variable | MCS-Mexico 2013 | National Accounts-INEGI |
GDP | 16288503 | 16 277 187 |
Intermediate consumption" | 8091 685 | 8 091 685 |
Exports | 4915878 | 5 068 030 |
Imports | 5248780 | 5 251 825 |
Aggregate supply | 27 642 648 | 27 642 648 |
Savings | 3436410 | 3 661 290 |
FBKF | 3 661 290 | 3 661 290 |
Note: aIntermediate imports not included.
Source: compiled by the authors using data from the SAM-Mexico 2013 INEGI (2018c).
In the SAM-Mexico 2013, a total value of MXN$ 83,712,129 million was obtained on the expenditure side (column 39 T-Income), similar to that obtained on the expenditure side (line 39 T-Expenditure); however, there is a discrepancy of MXN$152 billion, equivalent to 0.18% of the total value of income and expenditure in the matrix, as recorded in the UFOS column. This is due to the fact that in some cases, the values of the line items do not have an exact match with their respective column.
Resolving the discrepancy between total income and expenditures requires examining in greater detail at least three account transactions that report inconsistencies of origin: total imports reported in the IOM concerning the value of imports in the ISA; the payment of remunerations from the rest of the world to households (distinct from the value reported for remittances); this value is reported in the ISA, but not in the IOM; and the transfers made between inter-agency sectors in sub-account D.759- Other miscellaneous current transfers. Other miscellaneous current transfers; this ISA account is the only one that does not comply with the double-entry principle (Total debits=Total credits).
4. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
The findings from the SAM-Mexico 2013 (see Table 13) reflect the state of the Mexican economy’s productive structure and institutional sectors. In addition to production, the matrix includes the distribution of income and expenditure of the sectors, thus completing the bridge of analysis that forms a methodological tool for the study of economic development from an inter-institutional perspective of the Mexican productive structure.
A brief accounting analysis of the Mexican economy illustrates the usefulness of the SAM-Mexico 2013. Here, it should be noted that the current characteristics of the productive structure and income distribution are the result of neoliberal policies that, since the 1980s, have skewed the economy outward, thus promoting a strong dependence on international markets, imported inputs, and foreign direct investment, causing an outflow of economic surplus through trade balance deficits, profit remittances from foreign companies, and capital flight (Puyana, 2020; Romero, 2020; Blancas, 2015). This translates into low economic growth rates with high-income concentration, along with higher levels of poverty and social exclusion of sectors of the population with lower levels of income and social opportunities7(Blancas and Aliphat, 2020).
Quadrant I of the SAM shows that intermediate consumption represents 29% of total supply, while imports account for 14%; a ratio of almost 2 to 1 between local and imported inputs. Additionally, 48% of total imports consist of electrical, electronic, and transportation goods, with subsector G-Manufacture of electrical, electronic, and transportation goods concentrating 75% of the demand for these imported goods.
Table 14 shows the export trend of the primary and secondary sectors; more than 25% of their demand corresponds to exports. This is characteristic of the so-called global economies (List, 1997), which, unlike national economies, do not privilege the development of national productive forces. Within a national economy, the objective is to ensure that production supplies the domestic market and not global production chains. On the production side, the main problem is imports from the secondary sector, as this sector, instead of functioning as an axis of integration between the primary and tertiary sectors within the national economy, serves as an articulator in the global economy at the expense of the national production system (Romero and Aliphat, 2019; Vázquez, 2020).
Economic sector | Total demand | Total supply | |||||
Domestic | Exports |
Total demand (%) |
Domestic production |
Foreign (imports) |
Total supply (%) |
||
Inputs |
Final consumption |
||||||
Primary sector | 59 | 15 | 27 | 100 | 94 | 6 | 100 |
Secondary sector | 26 | 44 | 29 | 100 | 74 | 26 | 100 |
Tertiary sector | 28 | 67 | 5 | 100 | 96 | 4 | 100 |
Source: compiled by the authors based on SAM-Mexico 2013.
In terms of institutional sectors (see Table 15), the breakdown of productive sectors and intermediate imports (15A) shows that 64% of imports correspond to intermediate goods and services destined for the secondary sector. Under the conditions of the SAM-Mexico 2013, greater demand from the secondary sector could increase imports, and an economic policy focused on promoting a greater demand for secondary goods would result in trade deficit balances with little effect on the national economy.
Import destination | Intermediate | Consumption | Investment |
15A Productive sectors | |||
Primary sector | 2.55 | ||
Secondary sector | 63.91 | ||
Tertiary sector | 11.07 | ||
Subtotal | 77.53% | ||
15B Homes | |||
Low income | 2.19 | ||
Medium-income | 4.40 | ||
High-income | 5.19 | ||
Subtotal | 11.78% | ||
15C Investment by type of asset | |||
MD - Food and beverage industry | 0.001 | ||
ME - Petroleum, chemical, and plastics products | 0.14 | ||
MG - Electrical, electronic, and transportation goods | 9.23 | ||
M0 - Other imports | 1.32 | ||
Subtotal | 10.69°% | ||
Total imports | 100% |
Source: compiled by the authors based on SAM-Mexico 2013.
In terms of households (see Table 15B), 11% of total imports correspond to consumer goods, and there is a direct relationship between household income and the demand for imported consumer goods. Encouraging households to reduce their consumption of imported goods would strengthen the national economy. Furthermore, government transfers would strengthen the national productive structure through greater household demand, thus leading to greater economic growth, in addition to having a positive effect on income distribution and poverty reduction.
Table 15C shows that 10% of total imports correspond to investment assets, of which electrical, electronic, and transportation goods are the most demanded, with a 9 to 10 ratio. This indicates that there is a potential market for the production of capital goods in Mexico, equivalent to MXN$ 464 billion, a value higher than the national consumption of goods in the primary sector, according to data from the SAM.
The way in which added value is distributed among institutional sectors, as a result of the productive structure, is one of the central aspects that the SAM-Mexico 2013 makes visible. Table 16 indicates that 54% of remuneration payments and 39% of EBO correspond to high-income households, with 3.7% of remunerations going to low-income households. This shows that an economic policy strategy focused solely on economic growth will result in greater income concentration, accompanied by the inevitable effects on poverty growth (Expósito et al., 2017).
Household type | Remunerations | % | EBO | % |
Low income | 511 | 11 | 74 | 0.6 |
Medium-income | 1 572 | 34 | 291 | 2.6 |
High-income | 2 470 | 54 | 3 932 | 35.0 |
Households subtotal | 4 554 | 100 | 4 297 | 39.0 |
Type of corporation | EBO | % | ||
Public non-financial corporations | 745 | 6.7 | ||
Private non-financial corporations | 3 028 | 27.4 | ||
Financial corporations | 375 | 3.4 | ||
Corporation subtotal | 4 148 | 38 | ||
Depreciation | 2 567 | 23.4 | ||
Total value-added | 4 554 | 100 | 8 445 | 100.0 |
Source: compiled by the authors based on SAM-Mexico 2013.
Of the added value distributed between companies, 27% (corresponding to EBO), goes to private non-financial corporations with national or foreign control, while only 3.4% goes to financial corporations, and 6.8% to public non-financial corporations; findings indicate that private non-financial corporations lead the concentration of EBO (19% of total value-added). Capital replacement (depreciation) accounts for 23% of total value-added.
The total income of the institutional sectors is made up of payments for productive factors and inter-institutional transfers. When institutional sector income is disaggregated, it can be seen that low-income households receive 17% of their income from government transfers and 7% from transfers from the rest of the world (remittances) (see Table 17). Income generated by financial corporations has a high ratio with the government (11% of their income). Additionally, the rest of the world is closely related to non-financial corporations, which means that about 9% of their income corresponds to the payment of profits or transfers made by domestic financial corporations in the hands of non-residents.
Institutional sector | Factor income | Households | Corporations | Government | Rest of the world | Total income (%) |
Households (average) | 65 | 0.2 | 22 | 10 | 3 | 100 |
Low income | 39 | 0.5 | 37 | 17 | 7 | 100 |
Medium income | 57 | 0.4 | 27 | 12 | 4 | 100 |
High income | 73 | 0.1 | 18 | 8 | 1.1 | 100 |
Corporations (average) | 73 | 8.9 | 12 | 4 | 2 | 100 |
Public non-financial corporations | 96 | 0.5 | 2 | 1.0 | 0.07 | 100 |
Private non-financial corporations | 88 | 3.3 | 6 | 1.2 | 2 | 100 |
Financial corporations | 26 | 26 | 34 | 11 | 3 | 100 |
Government | 13 | 18 | 29 | 40 | 0.03 | 100 |
Rest of the world | 89* | 0.2 | 9 | 2 | NA | 100 |
Notes: * The rest of the world receives income from the domestic economy, which are recorded in the factor payment table; NA: Not Applicable.
Source: compiled by the authors based on SAM-Mexico 2013.
Analyzing the way in which the institutional sectors spend their resources is essential for understanding the flow of money in the economy, and also allows for the formulation of government transfer strategies with a greater effect on the development of the domestic market. Table 18 presents spending by institutional sectors; households spend 4.7% of their income on the rest of the world, mainly on imports of consumer goods, with high-income households spending the largest amount of resources on the rest of the world (16%), a figure that is even higher than the proportion spent on government (14%). Low-income households allocate a greater proportion of their income to consumption, so their spending has a greater effect on the development of the domestic market. Private non-financial corporations allocate 10% of their income to transfers from abroad; the data suggest a structural flight of capital in the Mexican economy. Government spending is concentrated in consumption (33%) and transfers to households (22%). Finally, the rest of the world concentrates 92% of its income in consumption (exports from the national economy), 6% in transfers to households, and only 2% in transfers to companies, a figure that contrasts with the income it obtains from corporations.
Institutional sector | Households | Corporations | Total | Government | Restof theworld | |||||
Low | Medium | High | Total | Public non-financial | Private non-financial | Financial | ||||
Consumption | 84 | 80 | 75 | 79 | 33 | 92 | ||||
Direct taxes | 5.0 | 4.8 | 4.7 | 4.8 | NA | 0.0 | ||||
Imports | 4.9 | 5.0 | 4.3 | 4.6 | NA | NA | ||||
Transfers | 6 | 10 | 16 | 12 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 67 | 8 |
Households | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.25 | 2 | 65 | 43 | 52 | 23 | 6 |
Low-income | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.07 | 0.06 | 0.3 | 12 | 8 | 9 | 4 | 2 |
Middle-income | 0.04 | 0.1 | 0.12 | 0.09 | 0.5 | 19 | 13 | 15 | 7 | 3 |
High-income | 0.05 | 0.1 | 0.14 | 0.10 | 0.8 | 34 | 23 | 27 | 12 | 2 |
Corporations | 1.9 | 3.2 | 5.3 | 4.0 | 3.5 | 9 | 39 | 12 | 4 | 2 |
Government | 3.6 | 6.2 | 10 | 7.6 | 92 | 16 | 9 | 28 | 38 | 0.03 |
Rest of the world | 0.0 | 0.08 | 0.13 | 0.10 | 3 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 2 | NA |
Total | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
NA: No Applicable.
Source: Compiled by the authors based on SAM-Mexico 2013.
Finally, Table 19 analyzes the composition of investment (FBKF) in the economy. It can be seen that 66% of investment is concentrated in the secondary sector; however, 54% is directed to construction. As can be seen in the SAM, investment in Mexico is mainly in buildings and not in machinery; 7.5% of investment spending in the services sector is concentrated in the I-Shopping, food, beverages, ice, and tobacco sector, and only 0.2% goes to the K-Telecommunications sector. Seventy times more is spent on FBKF for final primary consumer goods stores than on Information and Communication Technologies (ICT).
Investment | Value | % |
Primary sector | 215 994 | 6.3 |
Secondary sector | 2 266 968 | 66.0 |
C-Construction and related services | 1 879 322 | 54.7 |
D-Food and beverage industry | 2 089 | 0.1 |
E-Petroleum products, chemicals, and plastics | 1 962 | 0.1 |
F-Mineral and non-metal industries | 53 971 | 1.6 |
G-Manufacturing of electrical, electronic, and transporatition goods | 302 942 | 8.8 |
H-Other industries | 26 683 | 0.8 |
Tertiary sector | 399 023 | 11.6 |
I-Grocery, food, beverages, ice, and tobacco trade | 256 911 | 7.5 |
K-Telecomunications | 7 375 | 0.2 |
Imports | 537 763 | 15.6 |
MD-Food and beverage industry | 68 | 0.0 |
ME-Petroleum products, chemicals, and plastics | 7 202 | 0.2 |
MG-Manufacturing of electrical, electronic, and trasportation goods | 464 062 | 13.5 |
MO-Other imports | 66 431 | 1.9 |
Indirect taxes | 16 662 | 0.5 |
Total | 3 436 410 | 100.0 |
Source: compiled by the authors based on SAM-Mexico 2013.
Regarding imports of investment assets, the Mexican economy is supplied with capital goods mainly from abroad; the percentage of imports related to electrical, electronic, and transportation goods is equivalent to the total expenditure per FBKF of the secondary sector (with the exception of construction spending). The data presented in Table 19 indicates that for every 100 pesos allocated to investment in Mexico in 2013, 54 were spent on construction activities, 15 on importing capital goods, and only 11 on domestic machinery and equipment.
5. CONCLUSIONS
The accounting analysis derived from the elaboration of the SAM-Mexico 2013 allows us to delve deeper into the intra- and inter-institutional relations of a systemic economy, finding a productive structure that is highly linked to the exterior and in which severe income distribution problems persist. The information provided by the SAM suggests that government transfers to households represent an increase in imports of intermediate goods, which is a crucial to the study of effective demand and economic growth.
In terms of economic development, the accounting analysis of the SAM-Mexico 2013 shows that low-income households are highly dependent on government transfers and resources from outside the economy (remittances); therefore, this category of households must increase their income obtained from the productive sphere, either through higher wages or through EBO, if possible. One proposal that could be derived from this analysis is to consolidate cooperatives that distribute the EBO generated among workers.
As a result of the accounting analysis, this article will allow for future economic development studies that consider the use of the SAM-Mexico 2013 and deepen the inter-institutional analysis through accounting multipliers and/or computable general equilibrium models.
REFERENCES
Banegas, R. y Blancas, A. (2019). The foreign saving moderating effect on public spending in Mexico. Revista Nicolaita de Estudios Económicos, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.33110/rnee.v14i1.285. [ Links ]
Blancas, A. (2006). Interinstitutional linkage analysis: a social accounting matrix multiplier approach for the Mexican economy. Economic Systems Research, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/09535310500440548. [ Links ]
______(2010). La fragilidad financiera en México. UNAM. [ Links ]
______(2015). Fuga de capitales en México: análisis y propuesta de medición. Problemas del Desarrollo. Revista Latinoamericana de Economía, 46(181). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rpd.2015.01.001. [ Links ]
Blancas, A. y Aliphat, R. (2020). Empleo decente digno y salario justo en el crecimiento de la productividad laboral en México. En A. Sánchez, I. Nava y N. Cruz (coords.), Bienestar y políticas públicas (pp. 281-310). UNAM-IIEC. [ Links ]
Breisinger, C., Thomas, M. y Thurlow, J. (2009). Social accounting matrices and multiplier analysis: An introduction with exercises, vol. 5. IFPRI. [ Links ]
Bustos, A. y Leyva, G. (2017). Towards a more realistic estimate of the income distribution in Mexico. Latin American Policy, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/lamp.12114. [ Links ]
Cardona, G., Cardenete, M. y Martínez, C. (2018). Estructura económica mexicana: sectores claves, estratégicos, impulsores e independientes 2012. Revista de Economía, 35(90 ). https://doi.org/10.33937/reveco.2018.90. [ Links ]
Casares, E., García, M. y Sobarzo, H. (2017). Las matrices de contabilidad social como base de datos y soporte de modelos multisectoriales. Econo-Quantum, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.18381/eq.v14i1.6544. [ Links ]
Chapa, C., Mosqueda, M. y Rangel, E. (2019). Matrices de contabilidad social para las regiones de México (documentos de trabajo 2019-20). Banco de México. https://www.banxico.org.mx/viewers2/JSP/docsInvestigacionAnio_es.jsp?static=y [ Links ]
Cortés, F. (2018). Desigualdad en el ingreso en México, 1963 a 2014. En A. Puyana y M. Puchet (coords.), América Latina en la larga historia de la desigualdad. Una revisión de causas, efectos y políticas (pp.119-146). FLACSO. [ Links ]
Expósito, A., Fernández, J. y Velasco, F. (2017). Crecimiento económico, pobreza y desigualdad: un análisis de eficiencia para América Latina en el siglo XXI. Revista de Economía Mundial, 47(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.33776/rem.v0i47.3869. [ Links ]
Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía (INEGI) (2013a). Sistema de Clasificación Industrial de América del Norte, México (SCIAN 2013). INEGI. http://www.inegi.org.mx. [ Links ]
______(2013b). Sistema de cuentas institucionales 2013. INEGI. http://www.inegi.org.mx. [ Links ]
______(2014). Encuesta Nacional de Ingresos y Gastos de los Hogares 2014 (ENIGH) [sitio de internet]. México, INEGI. http://www.inegi.org.mx. [ Links ]
______(2018a). Matriz Insumo-Producto 2013. INEGI. http://www.inegi.org.mx. [ Links ]
______(2018b). Sistema de Cuentas Nacionales de México: fuentes y metodologías: año base 2013. INEGI. http://www.inegi.org.mx. [ Links ]
______(2018c). Sistema de Cuentas Nacionales de México 2013. INEGI. http://www.INEGI.org.mx. [ Links ]
Leontief, W. (1941). The structure of American economy, 1919-1939. Oxford. [ Links ]
Leyva, G. (2004). El ajuste del ingreso de la ENIGH con la contabilidad nacional y la medición de la pobreza en México. (Serie documentos de investigación 19). SEDESOL. https://portalsocial.guanajuato.gob.mx/sites/default/files/documentos/2004_SEDESOL_El%20ajuste%20del%20ingreso%20de%20la%20ENIGH.PDF. [ Links ]
List, F. (1997). Sistema nacional de economía política: con el anexo esbozos de economía política americana. FCE. (Original publicado en 1841). [ Links ]
Nava, I. y Brown, F. (2018). Determinantes del ahorro de los hogares en México: un análisis de regresión cuantílica. Economía: teoría y práctica, 49. https://doi.org/10.24275/ETYPUAAM/NE/492018/Nava. [ Links ]
Núñez, G. y Romero, J. (2020). Nacionalismo y desarrollo: una alternativa para México. Revista CEPAL. 131(1).https://www.cepal.org/es/publicaciones/45961-nacionalismo-desarrollo-alternativa-mexico. [ Links ]
Organización de las Naciones Unidas (ONU) (1993). Sistema de Cuentas Nacionales 1993. ONU. [ Links ]
______(2016). Sistema de Cuentas Nacionales 2008. ONU. [ Links ]
Organización Internacional del Trabajo (OIT) (2019). Manual de uso de modelos de equilibrio general computable compactos, (Strengthen working paper), OIT. https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_emp/documents/publication/wcms_741481.pdf. [ Links ]
Puyana, A. (2020). Del Tratado de Libre Comercio de América del Norte al Acuerdo México-Estados Unidos-Canadá. ¿Nuevo capítulo de la inte gración México-Estados Unidos? El Trimestre Económico, 87(347 ). https://doi.org/10.20430/ete.v87i347.1086 [ Links ]
Quesnay, F. (1894). Tableau économique. MacMillan&Company. (Original publicado en 1758). [ Links ]
Robinson, S., Cattaneo, A. y El-Said, M. (2001). Updating and estimating a social accounting matrix using cross entropy methods. Economic Systems Research , 13(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/09535310120026247. [ Links ]
Romero, J. (2020). La herencia del experimento neoliberal. El Trimestre Económico , 87(345 ). https://doi.org/10.20430/ete.v87i345.1029. [ Links ]
Romero, J. y Aliphat, R. (2019). Import demand for intermediate goods in Mexico: 1993-2018. Atlantic Review of Economics, 3(3).http://www.aroec.org/ojs/index.php/ARoEc/article/view/93 [ Links ]
Stone, R. (1956). Input-output and the social accounts. University of Cambridge. [ Links ]
Vázquez, R. (2020). Efectos de las reformas del Consenso de Washington sobre la estructura industrial: los casos de México e India. América Latina en la Historia Económica, 27(3). https://doi.org/10.18232/alhe.1069 [ Links ]
Villatoro, P. (2015). Ajuste de los ingresos de las encuestas a las Cuentas Nacionales: una revisión de la literatura. (Serie estudios estadísticos 91). CEPAL. https://repositorio.cepal.org/handle/11362/37957. [ Links ]
1In 1973 Leontief was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics for his theoretical and empirical contributions on the Input-Output Model.
2In 1984 Stone was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics for his contributions to the system of national accounts, including his approaches to the SAM, which were adopted by the United Nations (UN).
3According to the UN (1993), as no standardized method exists, data from the IOM or supply and use tables can be used.
4In the case of the 2014 ENIGH, only the percentage structure of income/expenditure by household decile is taken, and not the absolute values, and it is assumed that the composition for 2014 is the same as that of 2013.
5INEGI's glossary of national accounts (2018b) defines the characteristics of each institutional sector.
6The data in the IOM does not allow for the determination of the demand for goods and services for previous or future periods.
Received: September 24, 2020; Accepted: February 24, 2021