IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/331174.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Impacts of the Euro-Tunisian Agreements of Free Exchange: Evaluation by a Computable General Equilibrium Model in 1996

Author

Listed:
  • Hadj Salem, Haykel

Abstract

Until nowadays, the South-Mediterranean countries have focused on their strategic choice which consists in the creation of a Euro-Mediterranean Free Trade Area (FTA). In the context of globalisation, this choice appears to be the best means which facilitates the integration of the south countries with the north countries of the Mediterranean. This FTA is going to be established progressively during a period of transition of 12 years. Among the first participants in the constitution of this zone, is Tunisia, which signed an agreement of association with the European Union (EU). This agreement is based on free exchange and on financial, economic and technical cooperation and it contains a social and cultural chapter and a political dialogue. Since the signature of this agreement, Tunisia has been interested in improving its internal economic situation through internal reforms (plan of structural adaptation, upgrading, fiscal reform …) to facilitate the application of external reforms. With the coming into force of this agreement, the free Euro-Tunisian exchange concerns exclusively industrial products, while the other products (farm produce) are going to be examined in the coming days. The object of this communication is to compare the effects of the free total exchange and the effects of the free industrial exchange between Tunisia and the EU in the Tunisian economy. This problem was estimated by means of a Computable General Equilibrium Model (CGEM). This document will be divided in two blocks of simulations. The first concerns total commercial liberalization (for all the products (agricultural and industrial) and all services (traders and non-traders) and for all the partners), while the second block consists in a partial commercial liberalization (only for manufactured goods, for all the partners). Each of these two blocks is subdivided into four simulations: 1°) A decline of 1/12 of the rate of import customs duty 2°) A decline of 1/6 of the rate of import customs duty 3°) A decline of 50% of the rate of import customs duty 4°) A total abolition of the rate of import customs duty In these two blocks, the EU constitutes the totality of the account of the Rest of the World, because it is considered as the main partner of Tunisia. In the light of the comparison of these eight simulations, we notice that a progressive commercial liberalization applied during a reasonable period remains an effective economic reform for a developing country. Moreover, such a liberalization is considered as preferable when it is applied to one or to a certain category of product. In other words, free progressive industrial exchange between Tunisia and the EU is considered as a good strategy for the constitution of a Euro-Mediterranean FTA by 2010.

Suggested Citation

  • Hadj Salem, Haykel, 2004. "Impacts of the Euro-Tunisian Agreements of Free Exchange: Evaluation by a Computable General Equilibrium Model in 1996," Conference papers 331174, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:331174
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/331174/files/1476.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Minot, Nicholas & Baulch, Bob, 2002. "The spatial distribution of poverty in Vietnam and the potential for targeting," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2829, The World Bank.
    2. Hertel, Thomas, 1997. "Global Trade Analysis: Modeling and applications," GTAP Books, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, number 7685, December.
    3. Castella, Jean-Christophe & Quang, Dang Dinh, 2002. "Doi Moi in the Mountains," IRRI Books, International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), number 281819.
    4. Minot, Nicholas & Goletti, Francesco, 2000. "Rice market liberalization and poverty in Viet Nam:," Research reports 114, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vasco Molini, 2006. "Food Security in Vietnam during the 1990s: The Empirical Evidence," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2006-67, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    2. Thomas W. Hertel & Jeffrey J. Reimer, 2006. "Predicting the Poverty Impacts of Trade Reform," QA - Rivista dell'Associazione Rossi-Doria, Associazione Rossi Doria, issue 2, May.
    3. Peterson, Everett B., 2004. "A Comparison of Marketing Margins Across Sectors, Users, and Regions," Conference papers 331224, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    4. Reimer, Jeffrey J., 2002. "Estimating the poverty impacts of trade liberalization," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2790, The World Bank.
    5. Simon J.Evenett & Mia Mikic & Ravi Ratnayake (ed.), 2011. "Trade-led growth: A sound strategy for Asia," ARTNeT Books and Research Reports, United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), number brr10.
    6. Ianchovichina, Elena, 2004. "Trade policy analysis in the presence of duty drawbacks," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 353-371, April.
    7. Pierre Boulanger & Hasan Dudu & Emanuele Ferrari & George Philippidis, 2016. "Russian Roulette at the Trade Table: A Specific Factors CGE Analysis of an Agri-food Import Ban," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(2), pages 272-291, June.
    8. Jiang, Tingsong, 2003. "The Impact of China's WTO Accession on its Regional Economies," Australasian Agribusiness Review, University of Melbourne, Department of Agriculture and Food Systems, vol. 11.
    9. Henseler, Martin & Piot-Lepetit, Isabelle & Ferrari, Emanuele & Mellado, Aida Gonzalez & Banse, Martin & Grethe, Harald & Parisi, Claudia & Hélaine, Sophie, 2013. "On the asynchronous approvals of GM crops: Potential market impacts of a trade disruption of EU soy imports," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 166-176.
    10. Adams, Philip D., 2008. "Insurance against Catastrophic Climate Change: How Much Will an Emissions Trading Scheme Cost Australia?," Conference papers 331770, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    11. Kym Anderson, 2005. "On the Virtues of Multilateral Trade Negotiations," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 81(255), pages 414-438, December.
    12. Pavel Ciaian & d'Artis Kancs & Jan Pokrivcak, 2008. "Comparative Advantages, Transaction Costs and Factor Content of Agricultural Trade: Empirical Evidence from the CEE," EERI Research Paper Series EERI_RP_2008_03, Economics and Econometrics Research Institute (EERI), Brussels.
    13. Kym Anderson & Anna Strutt, 2012. "Agriculture and Food Security in Asia by 2030," Macroeconomics Working Papers 23309, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    14. Dhoubhadel, Sunil P. & Taheripour, Farzad & Stockton, Mathew C., 2016. "Livestock Demand, Global Land Use, and Induced Greenhouse Gas Emissions," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235271, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Federico Perali & Stefania Lovo, 2009. "Counterfactual analysis using a regional dynamic general equilibrium model with historical calibration," Working Papers 58/2009, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    16. Mai, Yinhua, 2008. "Removing border protection on wheat and rice: effects on rural income and food self-sufficiency in China," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(2), pages 1-19.
    17. Lucian Cernat & Sam Laird & Alessandro Turrini, 2003. "How Important are Market Access Issues for Developing Countries in the Doha Agenda?," International Trade 0302004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Palatnik, Ruslana R. & Kan, Iddo & Rapaport-Rom, Mickey & Ghermandi, Andrea & Eboli, Fabio & Shechter, Mordechai, 2011. "Land transformation analysis and application," Conference papers 332155, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    19. Hareau, Guy Gaston & Norton, George W. & Mills, Bradford F. & Peterson, Everett B., 2004. "Potential Benefits Of Transgenic Rice In Asia: A General Equilibrium Approach," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20334, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    20. Lee, Hiro & van der Mensbrugghe, Dominique, 2005. "The impact of the US safeguard measures on Northeast Asian producers: General equilibrium assessments," MPRA Paper 82288, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:331174. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gtpurus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.