IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fpr/dsgddp/36.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Has trade liberalization in South Africa affected men and women differently?:

Author

Listed:
  • Thurlow, James

Abstract

"Trade liberalization is a central part of South Africa's post-Apartheid development strategy. However, despite considerable reforms, the country has failed to generate pro-poor growth, with both unemployment and inequality worsening over the last ten years. This has raised concern that trade liberalization may have worked against the country's development objectives. This study uses a dynamic general equilibrium and microsimulation model to assess the effects of trade liberalization on growth, employment and poverty in South Africa. More specifically, it examines how men and women have been affected differently and whether liberalization has contributed to the faster rise in female unemployment and poverty. The results suggest that trade policies have not contributed to increased poverty and that trade-induced technological change has accelerated growth. However, liberalization has changed the sectoral structure of production and has exacerbated income inequality. While male and female workers have benefited from trade-induced growth, it is male-headed households who have benefited more from rising factor incomes. Trade reforms have however contributed to the observed decline in the gender wage gap, but this has been driven by rising employment amongst higher-skilled female workers. As such, the decline in poverty amongst female-headed households has remained small. While further liberalization may increase growth and reduce poverty, it is men and male-headed households who are more likely to benefit. These findings suggest that, while there is no trade-off between trade reform and poverty reduction, the country should not rely on further liberalization to generate pro-poor growth or address the prevailing inequalities between different population groups, such as men and women." Author's Abstract

Suggested Citation

  • Thurlow, James, 2006. "Has trade liberalization in South Africa affected men and women differently?:," DSGD discussion papers 36, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
  • Handle: RePEc:fpr:dsgddp:36
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/dsgdp36.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. By Gunnar Jonsson & Arvind Subramanian, 2001. "Dynamic Gains from Trade: Evidence from South Africa," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 48(1), pages 1-8.
    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. Johannes Fedderke & Yongcheol Shin & Prabhat Vaze, 2003. "Trade, Technology and Wage Inequality in the South African Manufacturing Sectors," ESE Discussion Papers 106, Edinburgh School of Economics, University of Edinburgh.
    4. Fontana, Marzia & Wood, Adrian, 2000. "Modeling the Effects of Trade on Women, at Work and at Home," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 28(7), pages 1173-1190, July.
    5. Stephen S. Golub & Janet Ceglowski, 2002. "South African Real Exchange Rates And Manufacturing Competitiveness," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 70(6), pages 1047-1075, September.
    6. Ingrid Woolard & Murray Leibbrandt, 1999. "Measuring Poverty in South Africa," Working Papers 99033, University of Cape Town, Development Policy Research Unit.
    7. Vivek B. Arora & Ashok Bhundia, 2003. "Potential Output and total Factor Productivity Growth in Post-Apartheid South Africa," IMF Working Papers 03/178, International Monetary Fund.
    8. Ozler, Berk, 2007. "Not Separate, Not Equal: Poverty and Inequality in Post-apartheid South Africa," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, pages 487-529.
    9. Torfinn Harding & Jørn Rattsø, 2005. "The barrier model of productivity growth: South Africa," Discussion Papers 425, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    10. Löfgren, Hans & Harris, Rebecca Lee & Robinson, Sherman, 2001. "A standard computable general equilibrium (CGE) model in GAMS," TMD discussion papers 75, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    11. Edwards, Lawrence & Golub, Stephen S., 2004. "South Africa's International Cost Competitiveness and Exports in Manufacturing," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1323-1339, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Nathalie Chusseau & Joël Hellier, 2012. "Inequality in Emerging Countries," Working Papers hal-00993411, HAL.
    2. repec:bla:indres:v:56:y:2017:i:2:p:319-350 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Acharya, Sanjaya, 2011. "Making unilateral trade liberalisation beneficial to the poor," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 60-71, June.
    4. Dorrit Posel & Michael Rogan, 2012. "Gendered trends in poverty in the post-apartheid period, 1997--2006," Development Southern Africa, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(1), pages 97-113, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    trade liberalization; Inequality; Unemployment; General equilibrium model; Microsimulation model; Poverty; Gender issues; Female labor; Income inequality; Trade reform; Pro-poor growth;

    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:fpr:dsgddp:36. 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: (). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/ifprius.html .

    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.