IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/diw/diwrup/100en.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

CGE-Based Methods to Measure the Impact of Trade Liberalization on Poverty

Author

Listed:
  • Isabel Teichmann

Abstract

It is heavily discussed whether trade liberalization is good or bad for the poor in a given (developing) country. The answer depends on a wide variety of factors, such as the type of trade barrier removed, the economic and institutional environment in the country, and the characteristics of the poor in that country (Winters 2002; Winters et al. 2004). In addition, the results can also be driven by the specific method used to measure the impact of the trade-policy reform on poverty. For an informed discussion, it is, therefore, important to understand the corresponding empirical methods at hand.Most generally, empirical studies on trade impacts can be divided into ex-post and ex-ante analyses. Whereas ex-post studies focus on the effects of trade policies that have already been implemented, ex-ante analyses simulate the effects of potential future (and actual) trade policies (Piermartini and Teh 2005). In other words, ex-post studies have both pre- and post-reform data at their disposal, while ex-ante studies rely exclusively on pre-liberalization data. Ex-post analyses have the advantage of being grounded on real-world observations; however, their difficulty lies in applying appropriate statistical methods to separate the impact of a given trade-policy reform from any other shock affecting the economy in the observation period (Hertel and Reimer 2005; Piermartini and Teh 2005). This identification problem is absent in ex-ante studies, conducting counterfactual analyses, as they allow to explicitly and exclusively simulate the trade-policy shock (Hertel and Reimer 2005). However, simulation studies encounter yet other challenges, namely to verify the assumptions concerning the model specification (e.g., parameters and functional forms) and, thus, to ensure the quality of the results (Piermartini and Teh 2005; Winters et al. 2004). Their strength, in turn, is to reveal possible orders of magnitude of a policy impact, to identify relative winners and losers, and to give insights into the quantitative importance of the mechanisms behind the effects of a given trade-policy reform on poverty (Winters 2003; Winters et al. 2004; Bourguignon et al. 1991).While examples of ex-post methods to analyze the effects of trade liberalization on poverty can be found in Winters et al. (2004), this Roundup gives an overview of some basic ex-ante methods available to quantify and evaluate the impact of a trade-policy reform – or, more generally, a macro-economic shock – on the distribution of household income for poverty (and inequality) analysis, i.e. on the micro-economic level. The methods considered here center all around so-called computable general equilibrium (CGE) models. On the one hand, they include the standard CGE approach with (one or) several representative households; on the other hand, they cover macro-micro simulations, subdivided into the top-down approach, the top-down/bottom-up approach, and the integrated approach. For each method, the Roundup provides a brief description, some applications, and a critical assessment.

Suggested Citation

  • Isabel Teichmann, 2016. "CGE-Based Methods to Measure the Impact of Trade Liberalization on Poverty," DIW Roundup: Politik im Fokus 100, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:diw:diwrup:100en
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.540467.de/DIW_Roundup_100_en.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hertel, Thomas & Monika Verma & Maros Ivanic & Ana R. Rios, 2011. "GTAP-POV: A Framework for Assessing the National Poverty Impacts of Global Economic and Environmental Policies," GTAP Technical Papers 3731, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    2. Ole Boysen & Alan Matthews, 2017. "Will Economic Partnership Agreements Increase Poverty? The Case of Uganda," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(2), pages 353-382, May.
    3. John Cockburn & Luc Savard & Luca Tiberti, 2014. "Macro-Micro Models," Contributions to Economic Analysis, in: Handbook of Microsimulation Modelling, volume 127, pages 275-304, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    4. François Bourguignon & Maurizio Bussolo & Luis Pereira, 2008. "The Impact of Macroeconomic Policies on Poverty and Income Distribution," PSE-Ecole d'économie de Paris (Postprint) halshs-00754864, HAL.
    5. Nicita, Alessandro, 2005. "Multilateral trade liberalization and Mexican households : the effect of the Doha development agenda," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3707, The World Bank.
    6. Thomas W. Hertel & L. Alan Winters, 2005. "Estimating the Poverty Impacts of a Prospective Doha Development Agenda," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(8), pages 1057-1071, August.
    7. 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.
    8. Rob Vos & Niek De Jong, 2003. "Trade Liberalization and Poverty in Ecuador: A CGE Macro-Microsimulation Analysis," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 211-232.
    9. Piermartini, Roberta & Teh, Robert, 2005. "Demystifying modelling methods for trade policy," WTO Discussion Papers 10, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    10. Ravallion, Martin & van de Walle, Dominique, 1991. "The impact on poverty of food pricing reforms: A welfare analysis for Indonesia," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 281-299.
    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. Dorothée Boccanfuso & Massa Coulibaly & Luc Savard & Govinda Timilsina, 2018. "Macroeconomic and Distributional Impacts of Jatropha Based Biodiesel in Mali," Economies, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-22, November.
    2. Ole Boysen & Alan Matthews, 2008. "The Impact of Developed Country Agricultural Trade Liberalization on Poverty: A Survey," Working Papers hal-03416399, HAL.
    3. Dorothée BOCCANFUSO & Massa COULABY & Govinda R TIMILSINA & Luc SAVARD, 2010. "Economic and Distributional Impact of Bio-Fuels in Mali," EcoMod2010 259600032, EcoMod.
    4. Dorothée Boccanfuso & Antonio Estache & Luc Savard, 2009. "Electricity Reforms In Mali: A Macro–Micro Analysis Of The Effects On Poverty And Distribution," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 77(1), pages 127-147, March.
    5. Dorothée Boccanfuso & Luc Savard, 2011. "The Food Crisis and its Impacts on Poverty in Senegal and Mali: Crossed Destinies," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 29(2), pages 211-247, March.
    6. Verikios, George & Zhang, Xiao-guang, 2015. "Reform of Australian urban transport: A CGE-microsimulation analysis of the effects on income distribution," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 7-17.
    7. Samir Cury & Euclides Pedrozo, 2016. "Cash Transfer Policies, Taxation and the Fall in Inequality in Brazil An Integrated Microsimulation-CGE Analysis [equilibrium model, microsimulation model, Brazil. Classification-JEL: C68, D58, I38," International Journal of Microsimulation, International Microsimulation Association, vol. 9(1), pages 55-85.
    8. Dorothée Boccanfuso & Antonio Estache & Luc Savard, 2007. "Electricity Reforms in Senegal: A Macro–Micro Analysis of the Effects on Poverty and Distribution," Cahiers de recherche 07-12, Departement d'économique de l'École de gestion à l'Université de Sherbrooke.
    9. Maurizio Bussolo & Rafael E De Hoyos & Denis Medvedev, 2010. "Economic growth and income distribution: linking macro-economic models with household survey data at the global level," International Journal of Microsimulation, International Microsimulation Association, vol. 3(1), pages 92-103.
    10. Nadia Belhaj Hassine & Veronique Robichaud & Bernard Decaluwé, 2010. "Agricultural Trade Liberalization, Productivity Gain and Poverty Alleviation: A General Equilibrium Analysis," Working Papers 519, Economic Research Forum, revised 05 Jan 2010.
    11. Anderson, Edward, 2020. "The impact of trade liberalisation on poverty and inequality: Evidence from CGE models," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 1208-1227.
    12. Nadia Belhaj Hassine & Veronique Robichaud & Bernard Decaluwé, 2010. "Does Agricultural Trade Liberalization Help The Poor in Tunisia? A Micro-Macro View in A Dynamic General Equilibrium Context," Working Papers 556, Economic Research Forum, revised 10 Jan 2010.
    13. Dorothée Boccanfuso & Luc Savard & Antonio Estache, 2013. "The Distributional Impact of Developed Countries’ Climate Change Policies on Senegal: A Macro-Micro CGE Application," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(6), pages 1-24, June.
    14. Maheshwar Rao & Robert Tanton & Yogi Vidyattama, 2013. "‘A Systems Approach to Analyse the Impacts of Water Policy Reform in the Murray-Darling Basin: a conceptual and an analytical framework’," NATSEM Working Paper Series 13/22, University of Canberra, National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling.
    15. Kym Anderson & John Cockburn & Will Martin, 2011. "Would Freeing Up World Trade Reduce Poverty and Inequality? The Vexed Role of Agricultural Distortions," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(4), pages 487-515, April.
    16. Vandyck, Toon & Van Regemorter, Denise, 2014. "Distributional and regional economic impact of energy taxes in Belgium," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 190-203.
    17. Dorothée Boccanfuso & G. Rodolphe A. Missinhoun & Luc Savard, 2010. "Réformes economiques et croissance pro-pauvre : une application macro-micro aux Philippines," Recherches économiques de Louvain, De Boeck Université, vol. 76(3), pages 257-288.
    18. Andreas Peichl, 2009. "The Benefits and Problems of Linking Micro and Macro Models — Evidence from a Flat Tax Analysis," Journal of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 301-329, November.
    19. Céline DE QUATREBARBES & Luc SAVARD & Dorothée BOCCANFUSO, 2011. "Can the removal of VAT Exemptions support the Poor? The Case of Niger," Working Papers 201106, CERDI.
    20. Edward J. Balistreri & Maryla Maliszewska & Israel Osorio-Rodarte & David G. Tarr & Hidemichi Yonezawa, 2016. "Poverty and Shared Prosperity Implications of Reducing Trade Costs Through Deep Integration in Eastern and Southern Africa," Working Papers 2016-07, Colorado School of Mines, Division of Economics and Business.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:diw:diwrup:100en. 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: Bibliothek (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/diwbede.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.