This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Developing Countries' Stake in the Doha Round

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Drusilla K. Brown (Tufts University)
Alan V. Deardorff (University of Michigan)
Robert M. Stern (University of Michigan)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

In this paper we discuss the various aspects of the Doha Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations in the WTO that offer potential benefits for developing countries. We then use the Michigan Model of World Production and Trade to simulate the economic effects on the major trading countries/regions of the reductions in tariffs, subsidies in agriculture, and barriers in services that may be negotiated in the Doha Round, as well as a variety of regional free trade agreements (FTAs). We estimate that an assumed reduction of post-Uruguay Round tariffs and other barriers on agricultural and industrial products and services by 33 percent in the Doha Round would increase world welfare by $686.4 billion, with significant gains for all industrialized and developing countries/regions. Regional agreements such as an APEC FTA, an ASEAN Plus 3 FTA, and a Western Hemisphere FTA would increase global and member country welfare, but by much less than the Doha multilateral trade round. There would also be trade diversion and detrimental welfare effects on some nonmember countries for the FTAs analyzed. The welfare gains from multilateral trade liberalization are therefore considerably greater than the gains from preferential trading arrangements and more uniformly positive for all countries.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://fordschool.umich.edu/rsie/workingpapers/Papers476-500/r495.pdf
File Format:
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan in its series Working Papers with number 495.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML, plain text, BibTeX, RIS (EndNote), ReDIF
Length: 26 pages
Date of creation: 2003
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:mie:wpaper:495

Contact details of provider:
Postal: ANN ARBOR MICHIGAN 48109
Web page: http://www.fordschool.umich.edu/rsie/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (FSPP Webmaster).

Related research
Keywords: WTO Trade Liberalization

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
F10 - International Economics - - Trade - - - General
F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

  1. Thomas W. Hertel & Bernard M. Hoekman & Will Martin, 2002. "Developing Countries and a New Round of WTO Negotiations," World Bank Research Observer, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 113-140.
  2. Brown, Drusilla K & Stern, Robert M, 2001. "Measurement and Modeling of the Economic Effects of Trade and Investment Barriers in Services," Review of International Economics, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 9(2), pages 262-86, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  3. Harrison, W Jill & Pearson, K R, 1996. "Computing Solutions for Large General Equilibrium Models Using GEMPACK," Computational Economics, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 83-127, May.
    Other versions:
  4. Hertel, Thomas W. & Will Martin, 1999. "Would Developing Countries Gain from Inclusion of Manufactures in the WTO Negotiations?," GTAP Working Papers 397, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University. [Downloadable!]
  5. Drusilla K. Brown & Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M. Stern, 2000. "Computational Analysis of the Accession of Chile to the NAFTA and Western Hemisphere Integration," The World Economy, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 23(2), pages 145-174, 02. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  6. Bernard Hoekman, 2000. "The next round of services negotiations: identifying priorities and options," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue Jul, pages 31-52. [Downloadable!]
  7. Thomas W. Hertel, 2000. "Potential gains from reducing trade barriers in manufacturing, services and agriculture," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue Jul, pages 77-104. [Downloadable!]
  8. Drusilla K. Brown & Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M. Stern, 2001. "CGE Modeling and Analysis of Multilateral and Regional Negotiating Options," Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University 0108, Department of Economics, Tufts University. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)

  1. Sebastian Hess & Stephan von Cramon-Taubadel, 2007. "Assessing General and Partial Equilibrium Simulations of Doha Round Outcomes using Meta-Analysis," Center for European, Governance and Economic Development Research (cege) Discussion Papers 67, Center for European, Governance and Economic Development Research, University of Goettingen (Germany).. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? No RePEc service, like IDEAS, charges for the use or the display of bibliographic data.

This page was last updated on 2008-11-16.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.