About
SNA News and Notes
SNA News and Notes
Issue 6, July 1997
Milestones
in action
by Stefan Schweinfest, Economic Statistics Branch, UNSD
In SNA News and
Notes no. 4 (July 1996) six milestones for SNA implementation were
presented that had been formulated by the ISWGNA upon request of the Statistical
Commission. In order to make these milestones operational for the monitoring
of progress in the implementation of the SNA 1993, UNSD with assistance
from the UN Regional Commissions has elaborated a methodology to assess
individual countries based on the national accounts data they provide
to UNSD. A description of this methodology together with a table assessing
all countries for the period 1990-95 was presented to the 1997 meeting
of the Statistical Commission as a background document. The content of
this document is summarized in the following.
Country assessments
Countries respond
annually to the UNSD questionnaire, which contains over 60 national accounts
tables. A selection of 26 key tables was used in the assessment. In order
to measure whether a country had reached a certain milestone a set of
criteria was defined. For instance, in order to reach milestone 3 a country
needed to have reported (I) data on GDP broken down by expenditure components
and kind of activities (in either constant or current prices), (ii) data
on external transactions as well as (iii) data on the government sector,
including the capital account.
According to this
evaluation 56 of 184 UN memberstates assessed were considered in the pre-SNA
phase, 45 at milestone 1 and 56 at milestone 2. Only 27 countries reached
a milestone level of 3 or higher, reflecting that they had implemented
to some extent institutional sector accounts. The UNSD document points
out that one of the advantages of this assessment methodology is that
it is based on internationally available official data. On the other hand
the surprisingly low result for many countries indicates that there might
exist a serious problem of under-reporting of national accounts information
to UNSD. Some countries are likely to have advanced in the elaboration
of their national accounts, without yet reporting this information as
official country data to UNSD according to the questionnaire's standard
tables. UNSD is presently circulating the documentation on the assessment
to national statistical agencies for their review.
Formulation of implementation
targets
The milestones do
not only serve to monitor past progress in the SNA implementation, they
may also back up the formulation of implementation targets for the future,
at the national as well as at the international level. With regard to
global implementation priorities, the ISWGNA had put five options before
the Statistical Commission to consider. The Commission "recommended
that with regard to the medium term implementation targets priority attention
should be given to countries presently in the pre-SNA phase or in phase
1. More generally, the needs of special country groups (...) ought to
be taken into account [in the design of appropriate actions for implementing
the 1993 SNA]. The Commission noted that (...) different approaches might
be required in different regions" (Report of the 1997 session of
the Statistical Commission).
Accruals versus cash estimates of taxes on products
by Paul McCarthy,
Statistics Directorate, OECD
In principle, SNA
accounts are to be compiled on an accruals basis. However, there is also
recognition in paragraphs 7.59 and 7.60 of SNA93 that, when taxes are
never likely to be collected, it is not appropriate to record the full
accrual-based figure.
In practice, most
industrial activity recorded in a country's national accounts is based
on surveys of businesses, which include details of the amounts due to
be paid in taxes on products (such as VAT). However, a reconciliation
with the government accounts often reveals government receipts of such
taxes running at a much lower level than that reported by businesses.
The way in which such an issue should be handled will differ depending
on what is actually causing the difference to occur. It is possible that
the gap arises from the taxes being collected by businesses through the
prices they charge but, in effect, never being passed on to government
(i.e., a tax evasion problem).
On the other hand
it is possible that a significant gap could arise from businesses using
accrual-based accounting and government using cash-based accounting. Any
delay in passing on the taxes to government could lead to discrepancies
between the two sets of estimates, particularly in countries suffering
from high inflation.
If the difference
arises because businesses charge their customers the full amount of the
tax but do not pass it all on to government, the part which is retained
by businesses should not be treated as a tax on products. Based on the
data supplied by businesses, the valuation of GDP at market prices is
correct but the value of GDP at basic prices should be calculated as GDP
at market prices less that part of the tax which is actually passed on
to government. In other words, within GDP at market prices, the mix between
operating surplus and taxes on products is changed compared with the situation
based on the data reported by businesses.
In the second situation
above, the taxes collected by businesses are all being passed on to government
but the difference arises because businesses are using accrual accounting
and the government is using cash accounting. In this case, GDP at market
prices and at basic prices as measured by business data would both be
correct and an adjustment would have to be made to the government tax
receipts to bring them up to the appropriate (accrual-based) level.
Wages paid in arrears
In some countries
at present, government workers are not being paid until several months
past the time when the work is actually done. If it is clear that the
wages will be ultimately paid, it is appropriate for the (accrued) income
to be shown as part of the national accounts estimates of production.
However, a problem of interpreting the accounts arises when this income
is attributed to households. The reality of the income/saving squeeze
being faced by households will not be reflected in the sectoral accounts
in the estimate of household saving, which is derived as the difference
between total income (containing a "non-paid" element) and total
consumption. The national accounting treatment of this situation is to
record the wages on an accruals basis (i.e., as having been paid when
the work was actually done). The impact on household saving would probably
be to show a higher level of saving than would otherwise be the case.
The squeeze on wages would generally reduce consumption, which would be
financed by some rundown in saving, but this would be more than offset
by the jump in saving caused by the accrued (but unpaid) wages. In effect,
the unpaid wages are being shown (correctly) in the accounts as involuntary
or forced saving. When the problem of accruals versus cash wages is acute,
it is recommended that the items for compensation of employees, disposable
income and saving be further disaggregated to show the cash-based estimates
separately (as memorandum items) from the accrual elements. In this way,
the extent of household saving that may be involuntary because of the
accrued lag will be immediately apparent. Clearly, the counterpart entries
(either corporations or government) should be similarly disaggregated.
All the above proposals are based on the assumption that the wages due
are eventually paid. To the extent that such wages are never paid, neither
they nor the corresponding government output should be recorded.
Intangible
assets, patents and copyrights in the 1993 SNA
by Peter Hill, Statistical
Division, United Nations Economic Commission for Europe
Accounting for intangible
assets, and any associated patents or copyrights, is an area in which
some significant improvements occurred between the 1968 and the 1993 SNA.
However, patents cannot be treated symmetrically with copyrights in the
1993 SNA because of difficulties created by the decision to continue to
treat all expenditures on R and D as current. The purpose of this note
is to try to clarify the complex issues involved which may be a source
of some confusion.
Patents and copyrights
are legal instruments which constitute evidence of their holders' ownership
rights over certain kinds of intangible assets which may be described
as `originals' as they are the outputs produced by creative or innovative
activities of a scientific, engineering, entertainment, artistic or literary
nature. Patents confer ownership rights over scientific originals or inventions,
whereas copyrights confer ownership rights over entertainment, artistic,
literary or programming originals (new recordings, films, manuscripts
etc. and computer software). The laws governing patents and copyrights
are broadly similar in most countries. The ownership rights conferred
by patents and copyrights are often described as `intellectual property
rights'.
Patents and copyrights
have to be clearly distinguished from the intangible assets to which they
relate. Similar kinds of legal instruments may exist for tangible assets:
for example, the `deeds' of a house (i.e., the legal documents which are
evidence of ownership over a house) are obviously very different from
the house itself. It is convenient to explain the treatment of copyrights
first as they are not subject to certain additional complications which
affect patents in the SNA.
Copyrights
The 1993 SNA explicitly
recognises the process of creating an entertainment, literary or artistic
original as falling within the production boundary of the SNA. The output
consists of an original in the form of a new visual and/or sound recording,
manuscript, musical composition, etc. The original is then used to produce
copies which are themselves used in further processes of production or
for consumption. The original must, in fact, be an intangible fixed
asset, as defined in para. 10.7 of the 1993 SNA, provided it is itself
used repeatedly or continuously in the production of other goods and services
(i.e., copies) for more than a year. Although an original has to be recorded
and stored on some physical medium -- paper, film, tape, disk, etc., --
it must be clearly distinguished from the latter. Blank pages, films,
tapes, disks, etc. have little value. They acquire value by having an
original recorded on them, the original being essentially an intangible
entity with no physical dimensions or coordinates of its own. Nothing
material is transferred from the original in the process of producing
the copies.
An entertainment,
literary or artistic original is therefore classified as an intangible
fixed asset in the 1993 SNA and recorded under AN.112 in the asset classification.
By definition, therefore, the acquisition of an original, whether through
own account production or purchase on the market, counts as gross fixed
capital formation. Notice that the copyright does not appear anywhere
in the asset classification because the copyright is not itself an asset,
being only a legal instrument providing evidence of ownership over an
asset. Any payments received by the owner of the asset -- i.e., the holder
of the copyright -- from other units who are licensed to use the asset
are conceptually equivalent to the rentals received by owners of tangible
fixed assets who lease them out. They are treated as payments for services
provided by the owner of the asset, whereas in the 1968 SNA they were
treated as a form of property income.
Writing new computer
software counts as production in the same way as writing a new book or
musical composition. In the 1993 SNA, a new computer programme is therefore
treated as an original, which must be an intangible fixed asset when it
is used repeatedly or continuously in the production of other goods and
services for more than a year. It is then classified under AN.112 alongside
artistic originals. As every PC user is aware, the creator of software
can obtain copyright.
Patents and scientific
originals
The situation is different
in the 1993 SNA, however, for scientific originals, such as inventions,
new drugs, new processes, etc. and any associated patents. Their treatment
is linked to that of expenditures on research and development (R and D).
This was the subject of an intense debate during the SNA revision process.
As R and D may continue to yield benefits long after it is undertaken,
it can be argued that the expenditures incurred are essentially capital
in nature. Most economists consider that R and D should be treated as
investment rather than consumption and many national accountants would
agree with them. Despite long discussions and extensive consultations
with national statistical offices, no consensus emerged during the revision
process, but a majority favoured continuing to classify all expenditures
on R and D as current. The reluctance to classify expenditures on R and
D as capital formation may be explained more by practical than conceptual
considerations because of the difficulty of identifying and valuing the
`assets' produced by many R and D activities and accounting for their
subsequent use and consumption.
In consequence, the
outputs of R and D establishments are treated as being consumed as they
are produced. Even though scientific originals may be produced which are
assets from an economic point of view, they cannot be recognised as assets
within the SNA. There is no category `scientific originals' under intangible
fixed assets, AN.112, in the asset classification of the 1993 SNA. Nevertheless,
patents may be taken out which establish legal ownership over these supposedly
non-existent produced assets.
The SNA is placed
in an impossible situation. In reality, the holders of the patents are
owners of assets which must be recorded in the balance sheets of the SNA.
Moreover, the holders of the patents also engage in transactions which
have to be accounted for. The 1993 SNA was fully cognizant of the problem
and tried to find a way around it. Recognising that assets in the form
of `patented entities' do exist, it felt obliged to classify them under
AN.221, non-produced intangible assets. These are described (p.
310 of the 1993 SNA) as `constitutions of matter, processes, mechanisms,
electrical and electronic devices, pharmaceutical formulations and new
varieties of living things produced by artifice'. The trouble is, of course,
that these entities are clearly scientific originals produced as the outputs
of activities which fall within the production boundary of the SNA. This
implies that they ought to be classified as intangible produced
assets alongside entertainment, scientific and literary originals and
computer software, i.e., as intangible fixed assets. This would
in turn imply that their acquisition should be classified as gross fixed
capital formation, but this option is ruled out by the R and D decision.
There is no conceptually satisfactory way of escaping from this impasse.
The potential confusion
is compounded by the fact that it was decided in the 1993 SNA to treat
payments of royalties to holders of patents, by convention, as payments
for services rendered (see para.7.92 and para. 69 of Annex 1), i.e., as
if they were rentals received from the lease of fixed assets. This
treatment would be valid if patented entities, i.e., scientific originals,
were recognised as fixed assets, but it is inconsistent both with their
classification asnon-produced intangible assets and with the decision
to treat all R and D as current.
Given the constraint
imposed by the R and D decision, another possibility might have been to
treat patents, by convention, as if they, and not the patented
entities, were the assets. Viewed as legal instruments (i.e., `constructs
of society' as described in AN.22) patents could then be classified as
non-produced intangible assets. Royalties would then have to be
classified as property income. In effect, this is the treatment adopted
in the 1968 SNA. However, the underlying inconsistency remains, whatever
expedient is adopted.
Conclusion
The treatment of programming,
entertainment, literary, and artistic originals and their associated copyrights
in the 1993 SNA constitutes a major improvement over the 1968 SNA. However,
a similar treatment for scientific originals is effectively blocked by
the decision to treat all expenditures on R and D as current which prevents
creative or innovative scientific activities from producing assets. As
a result, the SNA treatment of patents and patented entities is inherently,
and unavoidably, unsatisfactory and leads to inconsistencies within the
system. In effect, the SNA needs to move either forwards or backwards.
(1) One possibility
is to accept the fact that the decision to treat all R and D expenditures
as current implies that no assets are produced by R and D activities.
Assets in the form of scientific originals (i.e., patented entities) cannot
therefore exist. The patents themselves, as legal instruments, have to
be treated as non-produced assets and royalties treated as property incomes.
This means going back to the 1968 SNA.
(2) The other possibility
is to accept the fact that scientific originals do actually exist. This
implies that intangible fixed assets may be produced as outputs from R
and D activities so that some expenditures on R and D have to be classified
as gross fixed capital formation. In short, the treatment of scientific
originals should be aligned with that of entertainment, literary and other
artistic originals, and also computer software.
It is difficult to
see either change being made in the immediate future, as both would entail
important changes from the 1993 SNA. It may be necessary to continue to
live with the inconsistencies for the time being, but they should be recognised
as inconsistencies.
The first change would
be a retrograde step which ignores economic reality. It may be conjectured
that in the longer term the second change will eventually have to be made.
It is extremely difficult to justify the differing treatments of scientific
and other originals within the 1993 SNA, and it may also become increasingly
indefensible from an economic point of view to deny scientific originals
the status of intangible fixed assets in the face of the major contributions
which they appear to make to economic growth and development. The second
change does present a serious challenge to national accountants, however,
and requires further elaboration because simply reclassifying R and D
as capital formation would not dispose of the problems which concerned
those who were reluctant to do so during the SNA revision.
The
1993 SNA research agenda: A status report
by Jean-Etienne Chapron,
UNSD
The Inter-Secretariat
Working Group on National Accounts (ISWGNA) conducted recently a review
of its research agenda. The following article extracts from the UN Statistics
Division (UNSD) report a brief description which is structured in two
sections:
- Topics listed in
the research agenda of the 1993 SNA (pages xliii-xliv of english version)
- Additional research
topics which have emerged since 1993
Topics listed in
the 1993 SNA
The organizations
listed after the topics are those who have a visible output (expert
group meeting, handbook, etc.) completed or planned in the near future:
- Financial intermediation
services indirectly measured - FISIM (Statistical Office of the European
Communities (EUROSTAT)): Some technical points still to be decided.
Deadline Autumn 1997.
- Consumer subsidies
(EUROSTAT): Draft report ready by second half of 1997. First discussion
in a small European task force in Autumn 1997. Second version presented
for discussion to European working party on National Accounts and other
international organizations by December 1997.
- Informal/formal
distinction (UNSD, International Labour Office (ILO), UN Economic Commission
for Africa (ECA), UN Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the
Pacific (ESCAP)): UNSD/ECA workshop on services in the informal sector
in Addis-Ababa, June 1996. UNSD/ESCAP/ILO workshop on statistics on
the informal sector in Bangkok, 12.-16. May 1997.
- Environmental accounting
(UNSD, EUROSTAT, World Bank, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD)): Pilot studies in Europe, Africa, Asia, Latin America.
Finalization of the Operational Manual of the UN System for Integrated
Environmental and Economic Accounting (SEEA) by end 1997 (Nairobi Group).
Beginning of the revision of SEEA in 1997, through the London Group.
- Functional classifications:
OECD: Finalization of Classification of the functions of government
(COFOG), Classification of the purposes of non-profit institutions serving
households (COPNI) and Classification of individual consumption by purpose
(COICOP) in 1997. UNSD: First outline of Classification of outlays of
producers by purpose (COPP) circulated for comments in December 1996.
Draft COPP presented at the joint meeting OECD/EUROSTAT/UN Economic
Commission for Europe (ECE) in Paris, June 1997.
- Intangible assets
(EUROSTAT, OECD): European meeting in London (February 1996), international
workshop organized by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (March 1997).
OECD handbook planned for 1998-99. Contribution by the British Office
for National Statistics.
- Output of services,
including services produced within households (OECD, UNSD): OECD has
published in 1995 a study on "Households Production in OECD member
countries - Sources and Methods". Topic also included in UNSD work
on households' accounts (socio-economic accounting).
- Financial activities,
including derivatives (International Monetary Fund (IMF)): Monetary
and Financial Statistics Manual in final stages of review. Expert group
meeting in October 1996. On some derivatives, amendments requested to
the 1993 SNA.
- Regional Accounts
(EUROSTAT): Handbook in final stages.
- Review of purposes
and uses of the SNA (UNSD): Seminar on uses of national accounts scheduled
for 1998. Publication of proceedings in 1998-99.
From the list published
in the 1993 SNA, the following topics have not yet been addressed by
at least one member of ISWGNA: cost of capital, matrix presentation,
scope of capital formation (research and development, education and
human capital), labour accounts.
Additional research
topics
This section comprises
new research topics addressed by ISWGNA member organizations:
- Conversion of aggregates
from 1993 SNA to 1968 SNA (EUROSTAT): Methodology defined in 1996 for
conversion of the 1995 version of the European System of Accounts (ESA)
to its 1979 version.
- Hidden economy
(EUROSTAT, World Bank, OECD): European program of work 1995-98.
- Specific problems
of countries in transition (ECE, OECD, EUROSTAT, UNSD): UN Handbook
published in April 1997. Annual joint ECE/OECD meeting and related papers.
EUROSTAT's annual reports on work in progress in pre-adhesion countries.
- Socio-economic
accounting (UNSD): Expert group meeting on household satellite accounting
(socio-economic accounting) organized by UNSD in New York, 6.-10. October
1997, with a technical report published in 1998. Cooperation with the
Delhi-Group.
- Distribution of
GDP by households and measurement of poverty (World Bank): Work in progress.
Updating
the 1993 SNA
In the introduction
to the 1993 SNA, it is noted (p.xliii) that the "1993 SNA, like
its predecessors, represents a stage in the evolution of national accounting.
To continue that evolution, further research will need to be carried
out." It is more than 5 years since the 1993 SNA was finalised
and, in order to ensure its continuing relevance for purposes of economic
analysis and policy making, some parts of the system are already in
need of some updating. Periodic updating may be necessary to reflect
real changes taking place within economies; furthermore financial and
fiscal instruments continue to evolve, and accounting methodologies
improve, for example in the treatment of certain financial, intangible
or natural assets. Significant progress has already been reported in
some areas such as FISIM, functional classifications and certain financial
instruments (see SNA News and Notes no. 5, January 1997). Recognising
the need for some updating, the Statistical Commission has asked the
ISWGNA to make concrete proposals for a streamlined updating procedure
which also allows for adequate consultation.
In its first consideration
of this issue at a recent meeting, the ISWGNA sought to formulate some
general guidelines about the ways in which specific proposals for updating
might be processed, including procedures for consultations with appropriate
experts. Considerable thought was also given to the question of the
most effective ways of using modern technologies to communicate amendments
- once approved - to compilers and users. A detailed set of proposals
will be presented by the ISWGNA at the beginning of 1998.
Software
for national accounts in multiple dimensions
by Tjeerd Jellema
and Gosse Hommes, Institute of Social Studies Advisory Service, The
Hague, The Netherlands
According to 1993
SNA recommendations a System of National Accounts should consist of
a Supply / Use Table (SUT) and a System of Integrated Economic Accounts
(IEA), related through a Cross Classification Table (CCT). Together
they make up the integrated set of accounts called the Central Framework.
The system can include a variety of extensions and additions, such as
Satellite Accounts, Social Accounting Matrices and Regional Accounts.
The data management
needs of the compilation process of these component parts are varied,
and few National Accounts offices actually have a unified approach to
National Accounts data management. Few tools exist that fulfill all
of the requirements posed by an evolving and growing system of accounts.
IAS'96: A unique
solution
IAS'96 (Integrated
Accounts System) is based on the concept of n-dimensional data sets.
A user is completely free to define any data set of any (reasonable)
number of dimensions. This means that instead of being stored across
different worksheets (which happens when spreadsheet-based software
is used), all the data can be stored in a single data set. The user
can exercise total control over the structure of the accounting system
to be implemented. If the data set is intended for the purpose of a
base-year SUT, its definition will span activities, products, transaction,
supply and use and valuations layers. If, instead, it is intended for
a stand-alone IEA flow system, the data set will be defined in terms
of institutions, transactions and resources and uses. It is also possible
to create a dataset which combine SUT and IEA into the Central Framework.
Each of the dimensions,
in turn, is defined by means of hierarchical classification systems
such as, for instance, ISIC and CPC, which are completely user modifiable.
These hierarchical classifications are used for automated aggregation.
Furthermore all data screens - these are called Views - use the hierarchies
in the classifications to hide or show detail (collapse or expand categories)
in the accounting system. For instance, a view may show total intermediate
demand in a single cell and alternatively, by expanding the product
axis and the activity axis, the user can see (part of) a 200 by 200
matrix.
The capabilities
of IAS'96 allow it to closely mirror SNA'93 where it concerns the representation
of the accounts. It fully supports T-accounts and matrix representations
in its layout views, and layouts are again fully user specifiable. This
explains why IAS'96 is as adept at presenting the IEA as it is with
SUT or SAM data sets. It is even possible to have one layout view present
the Central Framework in the conventional representation and another
layout present the same data set as a Social Accounting Matrix.
The implementation
of formulas by IAS'96 is synonymous with the SNA concept. Formulas applied
to cells at a higher hierarchical level in the classification are applied
to all cells down the hierarchy, so it is equally feasible to enter
a single formula to define the concept of total supply across all products
(a vector), and another to compute value added across activities and
institutions (a plane) at the same time.
However, IAS'96
is first and foremost a national accountants tool and to this end it
supports the implementation of reconciliation strategies through manual
editing and through a more powerful concept of Rule-based editing. Thus,
every change made to a data set is saved in an edit history, so that
all of the steps taken during the reconciliation process remain available
for analysis.
The Rule-based editing
will allow the national accountant to perform such tasks as reclassification
, grossing up, rounding, the apportionment or pro-rating of data, and
(final) balancing by means of the RAS method implemented across multi
dimensions. Rules are saved and can be re-used; therefore, it is wholly
possible to specify a baseline balancing strategy, and apply it from
year to year. Complex operations, such as the transformation of a SUT
into Input-Output tables, are supported by means of so-called Experts.
The entire reconciliation
process can be transparently documented by using the Issue View, in
which each of the modifications to the data can be annotated and links
made to the actual edits, so that an integrated report can be prepared
on the entire process of compilation of the data.
Technical specifications
IAS'96 is based
on the combination of a strong relational database back-end imposing
structure and consistency on the data and the flexibility of a spreadsheet
with regard to the presentation of the data. It has been developed using
a compiled language (Delphi). The software requires 8 Mb of RAM to run
on Windows 3.1 systems, and 16 Mb of RAM to run on Windows 95 and Windows
NT systems, although more is recommended for larger accounting problems.
IAS'96 supports
data capture and export through the clipboard as well as through DDE
and provides file import and export to ASCII, Paradox and dBASE tables.
The present version
of IAS'96 is a 16-bit (Windows 3.1) application; however, this version
has already been successfully ported to Windows 95 as a 32-bit application.
Future versions of IAS will support the new platforms more fully.
Apart from a user
manual and an extensive help facility the documentation includes a series
of work-through exercises, as well as case studies in compiling the
major 1993 SNA manual sample tables.
IAS'96 has been
developed at the Institute of Social Studies Advisory Service (ISSAS),
The Hague, which forms part of the Institute of Social Studies. The
software package, developed by the authors of this article, draws upon
the experience gained by the Institute over the last two decades with
national accounting projects in Asian, Caribbean and Latin American
countries.
For more information
on IAS'96 please contact:
ISSAS, P.O.Box 29776, 2502 LT
The Hague, The Netherlands,
Telephone: 31-70-4260760,
Fax: 31-70-4260770,
E-mail: issas@iss.nl; 101453, 3264@ compuserve.com; 100334,2404@compuserve.com.
Meetings
and seminars
UNSD will hold an
Expert group meeting on linking business accounts to non-financial accounts
in New York from 18-22 August 1997.
In addition, UNSD
will also hold an Expert group meeting on household satellite accounting
in New York from 6-10 October 1997.
The third meeting
of the UN expert group on international economic and social classifications
will take place in New York from 1-3 December 1997.
The IMF will hold
a course on National accounts from 3-12 November 1997 in Washington,
D.C.
ECLAC together with
the Dutch Institute of Social Studies and the Latinamerican Institute
of Economic and Social Planning (ILPES) will hold a seminar in Santiago
on 1-12 December 1997 on Sustainable and Human Development concepts,
SAM-CGE Macroeconomic Modelling, Environmental Accounts and Systems
of Social Indicators.
The Center for Latinamerican
Monetary Studies (CEMLA) together with the Argentinian government will
organize a national accounts seminar in Buenos Aires 20-24 October 1997.
Editorial
note
SNA News and
Notes is a biannual information service of the Inter-Secretariat
Working Group on National Accounts (ISWGNA) prepared by the Statistics
Division of the United Nations. The member organizations that constitute
the ISWGNA are:
SNA News and
Notes does not necessarily express the official position of any
of the members of ISWGNA. For further details on the agenda
of ISWGNA and the spirit of the newsletter
see issue 1. For any further information on SNA News and Notes
or for comments, please contact:
Statistics Division
Economic Statistics Branch
United Nations
Room DC2-1720
New York, NY 10017, U.S.A.
Fax: +1-212-963-1374
E-mail: sna@un.org
| 
