SEMAINE D ETUDE SUR LE ROLE DE L’ANALYSE ECONOMETRIQUE ETC. 
855 
Obviously, given the non availability of valuable data, 
‘his can be no more than an indicative calculation. Neverthe- 
less its results are quite suggestive if they are compared with 
‘he different items in Tables 7, 8 and 9 which relate to the 
percentage contribution of primary income to capital and con- 
sumed income. 
Thus, the percentage 66.4 appearing in Table Ir in the 
breakdown of Rc differs relatively little from the 68.4 in 
Table 7, the 66.6 in Table 8 or the 54.5 in Table g. Similarly, 
the overall percentage of 83.7 corresponding in the breakdown 
of capital to equipment and structures after exclusion of repair 
and maintenance expenditures is directly comparable to the 
figures of 70.8 and 82.0 in Table 8 and g. Finally, the amor- 
lsation periods of 12.18 years for equipment and structural 
assets in Table 11 is directly comparable to the corresponding 
periods shown in Tables 8 and 9 as 9.56 and 8.15 respecti- 
vely (1). 
7) In usual practise, only those outlays whose amortisa- 
ion period is one year or longer are in principle considered as 
nvestment. 
However, in the first place, this limit is no more than a 
which repair and maintenance outlays represent in annual investment, then 
we should have 
vhence 
= 0.060 
from which the various figures in Table II follow. 
() If it is assumed that the cost of maintaining reproduction capital in 
operating condition represents one half of the sums devoted to investment, 
the breakdown percentages for C and R are found respectively as 10.2 
11.5 - 24.8 and 53.6 for C and 59.0 - 20.0 - 11.3 and 9.7 for Rec. 
11] Allais - pag. 15;