Author
Listed:
- Bautista, Romeo M.
- Thomas, Marcelle
Abstract
Using a CGE (computable general equilibrium) model for Zimbabwe with 1991 as base period, this paper examines quantitatively the income and equity effects of macroeconomic reform measures in isolation and in conjunction with potentially complementary changes in agricultural sector policies. Some important features of the CGE model are an explicit focus on agriculture, distinction among various rural and urban household groups, and detailed specification of factor markets. Specific aspects of economic policy existing in the pre-reform benchmark year are taken into account in the base model, such as the administered setting of the foreign exchange rate, quantitative import restrictions, and government-determined maize prices for domestic producers and grain millers. The model makes use of a 1991 SAM (social accounting matrix) for Zimbabwe as database. “Policy experiments” performed on the model include trade liberalization, maize price decontrol, fiscal reform measures, land redistribution, and reduction in agricultural marketing margins -- implemented in isolation and concurrently. Trade policy reform alone (dismantling of import and foreign exchange controls and reduction of import taxes to a low uniform rate) is shown to increase aggregate household income significantly. However, the least income gain accrues to smallholder farm households, which account for about four-fifths of the poor in Zimbabwe, so the equity impact is unfavorable. Concurrent implementation of two alternative land reform packages with trade liberalization, maize market decontrol, and income tax adjustment result in improved outcomes in aggregate income and in the incomes of poorer household groups. Significant synergy effects are revealed, as the income gains from policy reform packages exceed the sum of corresponding gains from component measures. The comparative results of counterfactual model simulations illuminate the greater effectiveness of trade policy reform in promoting overall income growth and equity when linked to complementary fiscal and sectoral reforms aimed at reducing poverty. They also give strong support to the general argument that piecemeal or partial reforms are inferior to more comprehensive reforms that take account of policy complementarities.
Suggested Citation
Handle:
RePEc:ags:iffp23:16313
DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.16313
Download full text from publisher
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:iffp23:16313. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.