IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Economic consequences of intifada

Listed author(s):
  • Paul de Boer
  • Marco Missaglia

In 2003 the World Bank (WB) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) published estimates of macro-economic indicators for 2002 of the economy of Palestine. The WB used a micro-founded recursive dynamic computable general equilibrium (CGE) model, calibrated on the 1998 Social Accounting Matrix (SAM) of Palestine, to which shocks were applied, whereas the IMF based its estimates on a macro-founded income-expenditure model relying on more recent data. It turned out that there were substantial differences: the estimate by the WB of the real gross national income (at 1998 prices) was 25% less than the corresponding figure calculated by the IMF. This huge difference is not only relevant for a full understanding of the economic consequences of the intifada, but also for the size of the international community intervention. In this paper we propose our own evaluation with the help of a static CGE model, based on the 1998 SAM and the so-called intifada shock derived from data of the WB that we constructed for the analysis of some forms of emergency assistance in a previous article. It turns out that our estimates, based on an entirely different methodology, are remarkably close to those of the IMF.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Economic Systems Research.

Volume (Year): 18 (2006)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Pages: 97-106

in new window

Handle: RePEc:taf:ecsysr:v:18:y:2006:i:1:p:97-106
DOI: 10.1080/09535310500440779
Contact details of provider: Web page:

Order Information: Web:

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.:

in new window

  1. Marco Missaglia & Paul de Boer, 2004. "Food-For-Work versus Cash-For-Work: Emergency Assistance in Palestine," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(4), pages 367-390.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:ecsysr:v:18:y:2006:i:1:p:97-106. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Chris Longhurst)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.