B. Effect of progress of ubiquitous networks on economic growth

According to the result of the estimation, the variables obtained by multiplying ICT capital by the ubiquitous index are significantly positive in all prefectures, proving that the effect in terms of economic efficiency and the use of ubiquitous networks through ICT capital make a positive contribution to the improvement of labor productivity $ ^{2} $ (Figure 1-2).

This indicates that local economies with low growth have the potential to grow dramatically, if the ubiquitous networks make progress and the economic efficiency of networks takes effect in all sectors, creating new innovations and added values.

C. Contribution of the progress of ubiquitous networks to the growth of real prefectural product

Based on the estimates analyzed in the previous section the contribution of the progress of ubiquitous networks of ICT capital to the economic growth of each prefecture is examined. The result shows that the contribution ratio in terms of economic efficiency and use of networks through ICT capital to the average growth rate of real gross prefectural product from 2001 to 2005 lies in between 0.35% and 1.71%, with the contribution rate exceeding 50% in 35 prefectures,

Fig. 1-2 Estimates of a model using prefectural panel data

Parameter	Coefficient	t-value
Capital share	$ \alpha' $	0.394	20.530
Hokkaiso	$ \beta $ 1	0.020	12.300
Aomori	$ \beta $ 2	0.013	6.980
Iwate	$ \beta $ 3	0.013	7.930
Miyagi	$ \beta $ 4	0.018	10.350
Akita	$ \beta $ 5	0.014	7.030
Yamagata	$ \beta $ 6	0.013	7.410
Fukushima	$ \beta $ 7	0.017	9.180
Ibaraki	$ \beta $ 8	0.021	12.170
Tochigi	$ \beta $ 9	0.019	10.970
Gunma	$ \beta $ 10	0.017	9.630
Saitama	$ \beta $ 11	0.024	15.420
Chiba	$ \beta $ 12	0.024	14.140
Tokyo	$ \beta $ 13	0.028	16.840
Kanagawa	$ \beta $ 14	0.023	13.190
Niigata	$ \beta $ 15	0.018	10.040
Toyama	$ \beta $ 16	0.016	7.450

Parameter	Coefficient	t-value
Ishikawa	$ \beta $ 17	0.019	11.150
Fukui	$ \beta $ 18	0.016	7.310
Yamanashi	$ \beta $ 19	0.018	9.450
Nagano	$ \beta $ 20	0.016	9.020
Gifu	$ \beta $ 21	0.018	9.220
Shizuoka	$ \beta $ 22	0.021	11.900
Aichi	$ \beta $ 23	0.019	10.390
Mie	$ \beta $ 24	0.023	11.500
Shiga	$ \beta $ 25	0.027	15.130
Kyoto	$ \beta $ 26	0.023	13.030
Osaka	$ \beta $ 27	0.020	11.220
Hyogo	$ \beta $ 28	0.019	9.340
Nara	$ \beta $ 29	0.026	14.060
Wakayama	$ \beta $ 30	0.013	6.100
Tottori	$ \beta $ 31	0.018	10.570
Shimane	$ \beta $ 32	0.015	8.680
Okayama	$ \beta $ 33	0.016	7.610

Parameter	Coefficient	t-value
Hiroshima	$ \beta $ 34	0.021	11.170
Yamaguchi	$ \beta $ 35	0.014	6.690
Tokushima	$ \beta $ 36	0.020	10.920
Kagawa	$ \beta $ 37	0.016	8.160
Ehime	$ \beta $ 38	0.011	6.220
Kochi	$ \beta $ 39	0.013	7.040
Fukuoka	$ \beta $ 40	0.017	9.570
Saga	$ \beta $ 41	0.015	8.360
Nagasaki	$ \beta $ 42	0.011	6.040
Kumato	$ \beta $ 43	0.011	6.420
Oita	$ \beta $ 44	0.018	9.290
Miyazaki	$ \beta $ 45	0.012	6.480
Kagoshima	$ \beta $ 46	0.015	8.760
Okinawa	$ \beta $ 47	0.018	11.050
Constant term	$ \ln A $	1.613	28.000

(Source) “Survey on Regional Economic Growth Brought about by the Development of a Ubiquitous Network”

Fig. 1-3 Decomposition of the average growth rate of real gross prefectural product (2001-2005)

(Source) “Survey on Regional Economic Growth Brought about by the Development of a Ubiquitous Network”