Is the core schema for the GHG model based on BEA or NAICS schema? #47
Replies: 4 comments 3 replies
-
|
While theoretically flowsa was designed to allow for alternate schemas, in practice it became challenging to enable the use of BEA schema directly. We have utilized some custom sectors to facilitate better alignment with NAICS, e.g., by adding quasi-NAICS for |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
A NAICS-based approach does provide a bit of future proofing for future disaggregation if the emissions are already assigned by NAICS and we are as explicit as possible when doing that mapping (i.e., assigning to 5 or 6 digit if possible even if only 4 digit is the unique BEA code) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
NAICS is more authoritative and more true to some industry environmental data. In the longer term is a better solution. However where their are truly unique identifiers in the BEA system as is done for construction, real estate and government as well as for final demand entities, we need to map directly to BEA and not let a forced NAICS intermediate mapping cause the attribution to be less accurate. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Cornerstone team's discussion favors a NAICS-based, BEA-compatible schema for GHG model. Specifically, we will create a hybrid schema that is primarily NAICS-based but includes additional BEA elements, which builds off of FLOWSA already has. For those NAICS codes like 23* and 92*, we will add BEA sectors to the schema. We believe this approach avoids complex mapping while maintaining compatibility with both systems. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Flowsa uses NAICS as the schema (which gets mapped to BEA sectors in useeior) while CEDA directly aligns with BEA. The flowsa schema uses between NAICS 3 - NAICS 6 depending on the mapping required for BEA. That is, we only map to 3 or 4 digits when that is sufficient for a single BEA code (e.g.,
2213is sufficient for221300instead of attributing all the way to221310221320and221330).What should be the target schema in the new model?
Resolved: A NAICS-based schema, hybridized with BEA sectors for select cases.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions