IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iffp19/42453.html

How Much Will Trade Liberalization Help the Poor? Comparing Global Trade Models

Author

Listed:
  • Bouet, Antoine

Abstract

The world community and international institutions have made development and poverty alleviation a high priority. The Millennium Development Goals, fixed by the United Nations for 2015, call for halving the number of people living on less than a dollar a day. With this goal in mind, the international community is calling current global trade negotiations, conducted by the World Trade Organization (WTO), the Doha Development Agenda. Trade liberalization is expected to act positively on development and poverty reduction. The recent empirical literature identifies several key linkages through which trade liberalization affects development: the price and availability of goods, factor prices, government transfers, incentives for investment and innovation, terms of trade, and short-run risk (Winters, McCulloch, and McKay 2004). The traditional argument in favor of a positive relationship between liberalization and poverty reduction focuses on the first two linkages. A large proportion of poor people work in the agricultural sector, where trade distortions are particularly high. Liberalization could lead to higher world agricultural prices and raise activity and remuneration in this sector in developing countries. The same beneficial outcome could occur in the textile and apparel sectors, where protection remains high and developing countries have a comparative advantage. But openness can also have negative effects. First, government transfers can shrink as liberalization cuts the government’s receipts of trade-related taxes. Second, terms of trade can deteriorate as liberalization affects world prices. Third, liberalization can impose adjustment costs and raise short-run risk owing to competition from imports and reallocation of productive factors. As a consequence, it is uncertain how much trade liberalization would reduce poverty, and many studies have attempted to assess the size of these benefits. The main empirical tool for this work is the multicountry computable general equilibrium (CGE) model—a sophisticated and complex tool of analysis that often appears as a “black box” from which results are difficult to understand.

Suggested Citation

  • Bouet, Antoine, 2006. "How Much Will Trade Liberalization Help the Poor? Comparing Global Trade Models," Research Briefs 42453, CGIAR, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:iffp19:42453
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.42453
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/42453/files/rb05.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.42453?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. William R. Cline, 2004. "Trade Policy and Global Poverty," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 379, October.
    2. L. ALAN WINTERS & NEIL McCULLOCH & ANDREW McKAY, 2015. "Trade Liberalization and Poverty: The Evidence So Far," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Non-Tariff Barriers, Regionalism and Poverty Essays in Applied International Trade Analysis, chapter 14, pages 271-314, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. repec:bla:ecpoli:v:20:y:2005:i:42:p:349-391 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Joseph Francois & Hans Van Meijl & Frank Van Tongeren, 2005. "Trade liberalization in the Doha Development Round [Trade in Manufactures, the Outcome of the Uruguay Round and Developing Country Interests]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 20(42), pages 350-391.
    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. Bouet, Antoine, 2009. "The Expected Benefits of Trade Liberalization for World Income and Development: Opening the "Black Box" of Global Trade Modeling," Food Policy Reviews 53871, CGIAR, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    2. Balogun, Emmanuel Dele & Dauda, Risikat O. S., 2012. "Poverty and employment impact of trade liberalization in Nigeria: empirical evidence and policy implications," MPRA Paper 41006, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 05 Sep 2012.
    3. Bouet, Antoine, 2006. "What Can the Poor Expect From Trade Liberalization? Opening the "Black Box" of Trade Modeling," MTID Discussion Papers 58575, CGIAR, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    4. Tarr, David G., 2013. "Putting Services and Foreign Direct Investment with Endogenous Productivity Effects in Computable General Equilibrium Models," Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, in: Peter B. Dixon & Dale Jorgenson (ed.), Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 303-377, Elsevier.
    5. 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.
    6. Montalbano, Pierluigi, 2011. "Trade Openness and Developing Countries' Vulnerability: Concepts, Misconceptions, and Directions for Research," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 1489-1502, September.
    7. Bardhan, Pranab, 2006. "Globalization and rural poverty," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1393-1404, August.
    8. Bureau, Jean-Christophe & Jean, Sebastien & Matthews, Alan, 2006. "The Consequences of Agricultural Trade Liberalization for Developing Countries," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25471, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Giordano, Paolo & Li, Kun, 2012. "An Updated Assessment of the Trade and Poverty Nexus in Latin America," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 4209, Inter-American Development Bank.
    10. Nissanke, Machiko & Thorbecke, Erik, 2006. "Channels and policy debate in the globalization-inequality-poverty nexus," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1338-1360, August.
    11. Zhicheng Liang, 2007. "Trade Liberalization, Economic Restructuring and Urban Poverty: The Case of China," Asian Economic Journal, East Asian Economic Association, vol. 21(3), pages 239-259, September.
    12. Ole Boysen & Alan Matthews, 2008. "The Impact of Developed Country Agricultural Trade Liberalization on Poverty: A Survey," Working Papers hal-03416399, HAL.
    13. 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.
    14. Bardhan, Pranab, 2006. "Globalization, Inequality, and Poverty," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 2329, Inter-American Development Bank.
    15. Valenzuela, Ernesto & Hertel, Thomas W. & Ivanic, Maros & Pratt, Alejandro Nin, 2004. "Evaluating Poverty Impacts of Globalization and Trade Policy Changes on Agricultural Producers," Conference papers 331307, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    16. Epo, Boniface Ngah & Abiala, Mireille Ambiana & Maimo, Clovis Wendji & Choub, Péguy Christophe Faha, 2010. "Globalization, Institutions, Asset Endowments and Poverty Reduction Outcomes in Africa within the Context of the Financial Crisis: Establishing a Transmission Mechanisms," MPRA Paper 20655, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Walker Wright, 2020. "How trade openness can help to ‘deliver the poor and needy’," Economic Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 100-107, February.
    18. Paolo Giordano & Kun Li, 2012. "An Updated Assessment of the Trade and Poverty Nexus in Latin America," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 79119, Inter-American Development Bank.
    19. John Gilbert, 2009. "Agricultural Trade Reform Under Doha and Poverty in India," Working Papers 2009-03, Utah State University, Department of Economics, revised 28 Jun 2009.
    20. John Cockburn & Erwin L. Corong & Caesar B. Cororaton, 2008. "Poverty Effects of the Philippines’ Tariff Reduction Program: Insights from a Computable General Equilibrium Analysis," Asian Economic Journal, East Asian Economic Association, vol. 22(3), pages 289-319, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    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:ags:iffp19:42453. 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/ifprius.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.