IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/wbadwp/52796.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Liberalizing Trade, and its Impact on Poverty and Inequality in Nicaragua

Author

Listed:
  • Sanchez, Marco V.
  • Vos, Rob

Abstract

The Doha Round of multilateral trade negotiations stalled in 2008 owing in no small degree to a lack of agreement on the terms of substantially reducing trade-distorting support for agricultural products and to what extent this would be beneficial to developing countries. Nicaragua presents an interesting case in point, being one of the poorest economies in Latin America with still a relatively large agricultural sector and high degrees of rural poverty. In 2005, the country signed a free trade agreement with the United States. A previous study showed that most welfare gains of this agreement for Nicaragua would potentially come from the increased market access for textiles and clothing exported to the United States. Under the agreement, the country stands to benefit much less from reducing tariffs on agricultural imports or agro-industrial export quotas. Since the United States is Nicaragua’s main trading partner, this raises the question whether further trade liberalization with all trading partners, including full elimination of all taxes and tariffs on agricultural production and trade, would be any more beneficial. Using a CGE model and a microsimulation methodology, this study shows that small welfare gains in terms of increased output and poverty reduction may be expected for Nicaragua under various scenarios of trade opening. At best, however, there would be a static gain in aggregate output of 1.5 percent as compared with the baseline scenario. This outcome would materialize only in a scenario of worldwide liberalization of trade in agricultural and non-agricultural products as this would yield relatively strong positive terms-of-trade effects for Nicaragua. Employment and real wage growth would contribute to poverty reduction, but only very modestly in a country with still widespread poverty. Most of these small gains would accrue to the rural poor. The analysis further shows that these gains tend to be smaller when using trade elasticity estimates based on country-specific data as compared with the much higher elasticities typically assumed by global trade models, including the Global Linkage model.

Suggested Citation

  • Sanchez, Marco V. & Vos, Rob, 2009. "Liberalizing Trade, and its Impact on Poverty and Inequality in Nicaragua," Agricultural Distortions Working Paper Series 52796, World Bank.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:wbadwp:52796
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.52796
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/52796/files/Liberalizing%20Trade%20and%20Its%20Impact%20on%20Poverty%20and%20Inequality%20%20in%20Nicaragua%20-Agricultural%20Distortions%20Working%20Paper%20107_%20June%202009.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.52796?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. Deininger, Klaus & Zegarra, Eduardo & Lavadenz, Isabel, 2003. "Determinants and Impacts of Rural Land Market Activity: Evidence from Nicaragua," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 31(8), pages 1385-1404, August.
    2. Fedesarrollo, 2005. "Impacto social del TLC con Estados Unidos," Coyuntura Social 12898, Fedesarrollo.
    3. Shaohua Chen & Martin Ravallion, 2010. "The Developing World is Poorer than We Thought, But No Less Successful in the Fight Against Poverty," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 125(4), pages 1577-1625.
    4. Claudio Bravo-Ortega & Daniel Lederman, 2004. "Agricultural productivity and its determinants: revisiting international experiences," Estudios de Economia, University of Chile, Department of Economics, vol. 31(2 Year 20), pages 133-163, December.
    5. World Bank, 2003. "Nicaragua - Poverty Assessment : Raising Welfare and Reducing Vulnerability," World Bank Publications - Reports 14668, The World Bank Group.
    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. Das Gupta, Monica & Bongaarts, John & Cleland, John, 2011. "Population, poverty, and sustainable development : a review of the evidence," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5719, The World Bank.
    2. John A. Maluccio, 2009. "Household targeting in practice: The Nicaraguan Red de Protección Social," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(1), pages 1-23.
    3. Michele Peruzzi & Alessio Terzi, 2018. "Growth Accelerations Strategies," CID Working Papers 91a, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    4. Almeida, Alexandre N. & Bravo-Ureta, Boris E., 2019. "Agricultural productivity, shadow wages and off-farm labor decisions in Nicaragua," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 99-110.
    5. Ghosh, sudeshna, 2017. "Education Attainment Forecasting and Economic Inequality United States," MPRA Paper 89712, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Augustin Kwasi Fosu, 2010. "The Global Financial Crisis and Development: Whither Africa," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2010-124, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    7. Katsushi Imai & Raghav Gaiha & Ganesh Thapa, 2010. "Is the Millennium Development Goal on Poverty Still Achievable? The Role of Institutions, Finance and Openness," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(3), pages 309-337.
    8. Ravallion, Martin, 2019. "Global inequality when unequal countries create unequal people," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 85-97.
    9. Vinod Thomas, 2009. "Income Disparity and Growth," Global Journal of Emerging Market Economies, Emerging Markets Forum, vol. 1(1), pages 63-86, January.
    10. Yin‐Wong Cheung & Eiji Fujii, 2014. "Exchange Rate Misalignment Estimates—Sources Of Differences," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(2), pages 91-121, March.
    11. Christoph Dörffel & Sebastian Schuhmann, 2020. "What is Inclusive Development? Introducing the Multidimensional Inclusiveness Index," Jena Economics Research Papers 2020-015, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    12. Martin Ravallion & Shaohua Chen, 2013. "A Proposal for Truly Global Poverty Measures," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 4(3), pages 258-265, September.
    13. Xuan Chen & Jing Chen & Chien-Yu Huang, 2019. "Too Risky to Focus on Agriculture? An Empirical Study of China’s Agricultural Households’ Off-Farm Employment Decisions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-18, January.
    14. Vakis, Renos & Kruger, Diana & Mason, Andrew D., 2004. "Shocks and coffee : lessons from Nicaragua," Social Protection Discussion Papers and Notes 30164, The World Bank.
    15. Kilic, Talip & Palacios-López, Amparo & Goldstein, Markus, 2015. "Caught in a Productivity Trap: A Distributional Perspective on Gender Differences in Malawian Agriculture," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 416-463.
    16. Renata Baborska & Emilio Hernandez & Emiliano Magrini & Cristian Morales-Opazo, 2020. "The impact of financial inclusion on rural food security experience: A perspective from low-and middle-income countries," Review of Development Finance Journal, Chartered Institute of Development Finance, vol. 10(2), pages 1-18.
    17. Hu, Yue & Liu, Chang & Peng, Jiangang, 2021. "Financial inclusion and agricultural total factor productivity growth in China," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 68-82.
    18. Jing Yang & Pundarik Mukhopadhaya, 2019. "Is the ADB’s Conjecture on Upward Trend in Poverty for China Right? An Analysis of Income and Multidimensional Poverty in China," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 143(2), pages 451-477, June.
    19. Ricardo Fort, 2007. "Land inequality and economic growth: a dynamic panel data approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 37(2‐3), pages 159-165, September.
    20. Bouquet, Emmanuelle, 2009. "State-Led Land Reform and Local Institutional Change: Land Titles, Land Markets and Tenure Security in Mexican Communities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1390-1399, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agricultural and Food Policy; International Relations/Trade;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:wbadwp:52796. 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/wlrdbus.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.