BIMSTEC-Japan Trade Cooperation and Poverty in Asia (original) (raw)
Related papers
BWPI Working Paper no.15/2007, Brooks World Poverty Institute, University of Manchester, UK, 2007
"With the widespread interest in the role that international trade can play in achieving the Millennium Development Goals, increasing attention is being given to the poverty impacts of trade liberalisation. The high level of public interest has stimulated renewed research activity aimed at expanding the evidence-base available to trade negotiators and policymakers. Within this context, computable general equilibrium economic modelling tools have been widely employed. This paper provides a critical assessment of the CGE economic modelling approach to assessing the impact of multilateral trade policy reform on poverty. It first summarises the results of recent modelling studies that have been widely quoted during the WTO’s Doha Development Agenda negotiations. The paper goes on to argue that although traditional representative agent CGE models tend to be by design ill-suited for poverty analysis, single-country CGE models linked to household micro-simulation modules may provide more relevant insights. Nevertheless, the latter need to be further coupled to other modelling approaches on both the macro and the micro side for a meaningful economic assessment of the trade-poverty nexus. Furthermore, CGE modelling results need to be integrated into a broader cross disciplinary approach, drawing on both quantitative and qualitative methods and evidence."
The impact of trade liberalization on household welfare and poverty in India
Trade Liberalization and Poverty: A CGE …, 2008
We construct a simple CGE model-representative of the core structure of the models in this book-to analyze the impacts of trade liberalization on poverty. This model is then used to carry out several simulations with alternative accompanying measures designed to compensate for the lost tariff revenue. The simulation results are then interpreted in terms of the various income and consumption channels through which trade liberalization and its accompanying measures influence poverty and, more generally, income distribution. Conclusions are then drawn with respect to the key considerations in the design of trade liberalization policies.
Assessing the impacts of trade on poverty and inequality
Applied Economics Letters, 2003
This paper uses a computable general equilibrium model to simulate different trade liberalization policy scenarios and counterfactual microsimulations to assess the impacts of greater trade openness on household income distribution and poverty ratios. Our conclusion is that trade liberalization alone may not be sufficient to significantly reduce poverty and inequality.
Impact of Trade Reforms on Poverty
The Pakistan Development Review
Trade plays a vital role in determining the growth process of any country. Trade liberalisation and openness of the economy are now almost universally accepted as the main ingredients of successful economic growth and welfare of the population. These are believed to be responsible for the exceptional growth of industrialised and newly industrialised countries. Many developing countries, under the auspices of the WTO are taking major steps to liberalise their trade regimes. However, in the short run, the impact of these policy changes is generally perceived to be painful for both the producers and the consumers; and especially so for the latter. A key question here is the impact of trade reforms on poverty, which has persisted in most developing countries despite concerted efforts on many fronts to eradicate this social evil. Like many developing countries, Pakistan has undertaken far-reaching trade reforms aimed at creating an open international trading environment. Pakistan’s depen...
Trade Liberalization and the Structure of Poverty in Developing Countries
2003
Globalization increases poverty" is a common assertion made by critic s of globalization. The proliferation of low-wage jobs and higher food prices are some of the arguments brought forward in support of this argument. One of the hallmarks of globalization is the systematic dismantling of barriers to trade. Advocates of trade liberalization -particularly industrialized country agriculture reform -argue that the ensuing rise in world prices for agriculture products will boost rural incomes, thereby reducing poverty in the poorest countries, where the bulk of world poverty resides. Who is right? The goal of this paper is take a systematic look at the structure of poverty across a range of developing countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America, and explore how national poverty rates in some of the poorest countries in the world are likely to be affected by global trade liberalization.
International Trade and Poverty Alleviation
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2000
The views expressed in this Working Paper are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the IMF or IMF policy. Working Papers describe research in progress by the author(s) and are published to elicit comments and to further debate. Empirical studies suggest that trade reform has a positive effect on employment and income for the poor; however, there are winners and losers. If the transitional costs of trade liberalization fall disproportionately on the poor, trade reform can be designed to mitigate these effects. This includes making reforms as broad based as possible, sequencing and phasing them to allow for adjustment, and implementing social safety nets and other reforms that facilitate adjustment to the new trade policy. In assessing these findings, it should be borne in mind that the links between trade reform and poverty are complex, making systematic empirical investigations difficult.
Laos’ World Trade Organization Accession and Poverty Reduction
World Trade Organization (WTO) accession produces tangible benefits but also has costs, especially for transitional economies and Least Developed Countries (LDC) like Laos. Despite the benefits and costs of WTO accession, there are very few quantitative studies on Laos" accession to the WTO. Therefore, the main objective of this paper is to attempt to quantify the economy-wide impact and poverty of Laos" WTO accession. We employ a standard GTAP model for this analysis. The simulation results show that Laos will gain from accession to the WTO, but these gains are quite small. The real GDP will increase about 0.5% and welfare (equivalent variation) will increase by about US$ 8 million. On the other hand, the trade deficit will increase and output in some sectors will be reduced. Therefore, it is difficult to conclude that Laos will gains benefits from WTO accession. The micro-simulation using the household survey indicates that the change in household welfare due to the tariff reduction is heterogeneous. The winners from the tariff reduction are households which live in Vientiane capital, and are the non-poor in the urban area. The losers from this policy change are the households which do not belong to the above categories, and their household income drops and their poverty rates increase slightly. The policy implication is that social safety nets for the possible losers are necessary in the future when the trade liberalization policy is implemented. Since this study focuses only the impact of the tariff reduction, the obtained impact might underor over-estimate all of the impact of the WTO accession.
Trade liberalization and poverty: Lessons from Asia and Africa
Manuscript. Université Laval, 2006
We bring together the lessons drawn from the computable general equilibrium (CGE) analysis of the impacts of trade liberalization on poverty in seven Asian and African countries: Bangladesh, Benin, India, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines and Senegal. We compare and contrast the results in these countries, explaining where there are similarities and why there are differences. Particular attention is paid to identifying how the specific characteristics of each country -initial tariff structure, trade patterns, relative factor endowments, production patterns, income sources and consumption patterns of the poor, etc. -modify the results. Conclusions are then drawn with respect to the key factors in managing trade liberalization and designing appropriate accompanying measures. Results show that trade liberalization has little but positive impact on welfare and poverty. Overall, industrial sectors benefit -relatively to agriculture -from trade liberalization and so are urban households relatively to their rural counterparts.