IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An Econometric Model of CGE Simulations


  • Hess, Sebastian


CGE models are widely used tools for economic assessments of trade policy changes. However, overall confidence in their results tends to be low. We employ the methodological framework of meta-analysis in order to approach a quantitative comparison of CGE-based simulation results. Therefore, we compile a dataset of twelve recent Doha simulations and fit a linear regression model that explains the variance between simulation results on the regional level as a function of various modeling characteristics. The estimates are broadly in range with documented qualitative knowledge about modeling assumptions. The size of the sample limits general conclusions; however, an ongoing research project will extend the approach to a larger sample.

Suggested Citation

  • Hess, Sebastian, 2005. "An Econometric Model of CGE Simulations," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24713, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaae05:24713

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Romer, Paul M, 1986. "Increasing Returns and Long-run Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(5), pages 1002-1037, October.
    2. Timothy J. Kehoe, 2003. "An evaluation of the performance of applied general equilibrium models of the impact of NAFTA," Staff Report 320, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
    3. S├ębastien Dessus & Kiichiro Fukasaku & Raed Safadi, 2001. "Multilateral Tariff Liberalisation and the Developing Countries," OECD Development Centre Policy Briefs 18, OECD Publishing.
    4. Diao, Xinshen & Somwaru, Agapi & Roe, Terry L., 2001. "A Global Analysis Of Agricultural Trade Reform In Wto Member Countries," Bulletins 12984, University of Minnesota, Economic Development Center.
    5. T. D. Stanley & Stephen B. Jarrell, 2005. "Meta-Regression Analysis: A Quantitative Method of Literature Surveys," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(3), pages 299-308, July.
    6. Hertel, Thomas W. & Kym Anderson & Joseph Francois & Will Martin, 2002. "Agriculture and Non-Agricultural Liberalization in the Millennium Round," GTAP Working Papers 235, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    7. Hertel, Thomas & Hummels, David & Ivanic, Maros & Keeney, Roman, 2007. "How confident can we be of CGE-based assessments of Free Trade Agreements?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 611-635, July.
    8. van Tongeren, Frank & van Meijl, Hans & Surry, Yves, 2001. "Global models applied to agricultural and trade policies: a review and assessment," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 149-172, November.
    9. Hertel, Thomas W., 1999. "Future Directions in Global Trade Analysis," GTAP Working Papers 298, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    10. Anderson, Kym & Hoekman, Bernard & Strutt, Anna, 2001. "Agriculture and the WTO: Next Steps," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(2), pages 192-214, May.
    11. Hertel, Thomas W., 2002. "Applied general equilibrium analysis of agricultural and resource policies," Handbook of Agricultural Economics,in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 26, pages 1373-1419 Elsevier.
    12. Francois, Joseph, 1998. "Scale Economies and Imperfect Competition in the GTAP Model," GTAP Technical Papers 317, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    13. Elbehri, Aziz & Hertel, Thomas, 2006. "A Comparative Analysis of the EU-Morocco FTA vs. Multilateral Liberalization," Journal of Economic Integration, Center for Economic Integration, Sejong University, vol. 21, pages 496-525.
    14. T. D. Stanley, 2001. "Wheat from Chaff: Meta-analysis as Quantitative Literature Review," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(3), pages 131-150, Summer.
    15. Emma Aisbett, 2007. "Why are the Critics So Convinced that Globalization is Bad for the Poor?," NBER Chapters,in: Globalization and Poverty, pages 33-86 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. 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.
    17. Dawkins, C., 1997. "Extended Sensitivity Analysis for Applied General Equilibrium Models," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 491, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    18. Krugman, Paul R., 1979. "Increasing returns, monopolistic competition, and international trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 469-479, November.
    19. N.Nagarajan, 1999. "The millennium round: An economic appraisal," European Economy - Economic Papers 2008 - 2015 139, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    20. Robert Scollay & John Gilbert, 2000. "Measuring the Gains from APEC Trade Liberalisation: An Overview of CGE Assessments," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(2), pages 175-197, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Lucke, Bernd & Zotti, Jacopo, 2016. "Macroeconomic effects of the Barcelona Initiative," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 837-854.

    More about this item


    CGE; systematic review; Doha round; evaluation; Research Methods/ Statistical Methods; C20; C68; D58; F10; C99;

    JEL classification:

    • C20 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - General
    • C68 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computable General Equilibrium Models
    • D58 - Microeconomics - - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium - - - Computable and Other Applied General Equilibrium Models
    • F10 - International Economics - - Trade - - - General
    • C99 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Other


    Access and download statistics


    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:eaae05:24713. 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: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.