IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/331461.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Will Madagascar benefit from the South African market opening to SADC goods ?

Author

Listed:
  • Ramilison, Eric Norbert

Abstract

After hesitating during more than a decade, Madagascar which is already a member of COMESA (Common Market of Eastern and Southern Africa) and is negotiating the new Economic Partnership Agreement between ACP and EU as a member of ESA (Eastern and Southern Africa) group decides to join SADC (Southern African Development Community). By doing that, Madagascar expect to enhance its trade flows with SADC country in general and with South Africa in particular. But will Madagascar really gain from the South African market opening to SADC goods ? For analyzing this issue, two kinds of modelling approaches are used. First, we use GTAP modelling to verify if each sub-division of SADC region can benefit from FTA within this community, and to check with which economic activity will gain the sub-region including Madagascar from the FTA. Then we find that FTA boosts export of the Rest of SADC to South Africa, and every sub-region will record a positive change of welfare even if safeguard measurement is implemented for several commodities. In second stage, we focus on effect of tariff removal of South Africa to all goods from other SADC members. In this case, we use WITS/TRAINS software with its possibility of getting information on 6-digit Harmonized System description of goods. Despite the fact that the trade liberalisation reveal to be a propoor strategy for the Rest of SADC (excluding SACU), it looks difficult to state whether Madagascar will benefit or not from the FTA within SADC. One wonders if Madagascar is not paying now its weak linkages to Southern Africa especially with the Republic of South Africa, as competition from some SADC members is strong.

Suggested Citation

  • Ramilison, Eric Norbert, 2006. "Will Madagascar benefit from the South African market opening to SADC goods ?," Conference papers 331461, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:331461
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/331461/files/2176.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kirit S. Parikh & N.S.S. Narayana & Manoj Panda & A. Ganesh Kumar, 1997. "Agricultural trade liberalization: growth, welfare and large country effects," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 17(1), pages 1-20, October.
    2. Parikh, Kirit S. & Narayana, N. S. S. & Panda, Manoj & Kumar, A. Ganesh, 1997. "Agricultural trade liberalization: growth, welfare and large country effects," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 17(1), pages 1-20, October.
    3. Hertel, Thomas, 1997. "Global Trade Analysis: Modeling and applications," GTAP Books, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, number 7685, December.
    4. Hewings, Geoffrey J. D. & Fonseca, Manuel & Guilhoto, Joaquim & Sonis, Michael, 1989. "Key sectors and structural change in the Brazilian economy: A comparison of alternative approaches and their policy implications," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 67-90.
    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. A. Ganesh-Kumar & Manoj K. Panda & Mary E. Burfisher, 2006. "Reforms in Indian agro-processing and agriculture sectors in the context of unilateral and multilateral trade agreements," Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai Working Papers 2006-011, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India.
    2. ZHANG, Lu & GUO, Qing & ZHANG, Junbiao & HUANG, Yong & XIONG, Tao, 2015. "Did China׳s rare earth export policies work? — Empirical evidence from USA and Japan," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 82-90.
    3. Marcel Fafchamps & Ruth Vargas Hill & Bart Minten, 2008. "Quality control in nonstaple food markets: evidence from India," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 38(3), pages 251-266, May.
    4. Koushik Das & Pinaki Chakraborti, 2014. "General Equilibrium Analysis of Strategic Trade: A Computable General Equilibrium Model for India," IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review, , vol. 3(2), pages 165-181, July.
    5. Koushik Das & Pinaki Chakraborti, 2012. "International Trade, Environment and Market Imperfection: A Computable General Equilibrium Analysis for India," South Asian Journal of Macroeconomics and Public Finance, , vol. 1(2), pages 157-190, December.
    6. Manoj K. Panda & A. Ganesh Kumar, 2008. "Trade liberalization, poverty and food security in India abstract: This paper attempts to assess the impact of trade," Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai Working Papers 2008-013, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India.
    7. Koushik Das, 2014. "General Equilibrium Analysis of Strategic Trade," Foreign Trade Review, , vol. 49(3), pages 219-245, August.
    8. Amrita Ganguly & Koushik Das, 2017. "Multi-sectoral Analysis of Foreign Investment and Trade Liberalization in India: A CGE Modelling Approach," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 18(5), pages 1345-1372, October.
    9. Shutes, Lindsay & Ganesh-Kumar, Anand & Meijerink, Gerdien W., 2012. "Fluctuating staple prices and household poverty in India," MPRA Paper 40982, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Simon J.Evenett & Mia Mikic & Ravi Ratnayake (ed.), 2011. "Trade-led growth: A sound strategy for Asia," ARTNeT Books and Research Reports, United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), number brr10.
    11. Ianchovichina, Elena, 2004. "Trade policy analysis in the presence of duty drawbacks," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 353-371, April.
    12. Pierre Boulanger & Hasan Dudu & Emanuele Ferrari & George Philippidis, 2016. "Russian Roulette at the Trade Table: A Specific Factors CGE Analysis of an Agri-food Import Ban," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(2), pages 272-291, June.
    13. Jiang, Tingsong, 2003. "The Impact of China's WTO Accession on its Regional Economies," Australasian Agribusiness Review, University of Melbourne, Department of Agriculture and Food Systems, vol. 11.
    14. Henseler, Martin & Piot-Lepetit, Isabelle & Ferrari, Emanuele & Mellado, Aida Gonzalez & Banse, Martin & Grethe, Harald & Parisi, Claudia & Hélaine, Sophie, 2013. "On the asynchronous approvals of GM crops: Potential market impacts of a trade disruption of EU soy imports," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 166-176.
    15. Adams, Philip D., 2008. "Insurance against Catastrophic Climate Change: How Much Will an Emissions Trading Scheme Cost Australia?," Conference papers 331770, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    16. Kym Anderson, 2005. "On the Virtues of Multilateral Trade Negotiations," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 81(255), pages 414-438, December.
    17. Pavel Ciaian & d'Artis Kancs & Jan Pokrivcak, 2008. "Comparative Advantages, Transaction Costs and Factor Content of Agricultural Trade: Empirical Evidence from the CEE," EERI Research Paper Series EERI_RP_2008_03, Economics and Econometrics Research Institute (EERI), Brussels.
    18. Kym Anderson & Anna Strutt, 2012. "Agriculture and Food Security in Asia by 2030," Macroeconomics Working Papers 23309, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    19. Dhoubhadel, Sunil P. & Taheripour, Farzad & Stockton, Mathew C., 2016. "Livestock Demand, Global Land Use, and Induced Greenhouse Gas Emissions," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235271, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. Federico Perali & Stefania Lovo, 2009. "Counterfactual analysis using a regional dynamic general equilibrium model with historical calibration," Working Papers 58/2009, University of Verona, Department of Economics.

    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:pugtwp:331461. 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/gtpurus.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.