Policy dilemmas in India: The Impact of changes in agricultural prices on rural and urban poverty
Trade policy reforms which lead to changes in world prices of agricultural commodities or domestic policies aimed at affecting agricultural prices are often seen as causing a policy dilemma: a fall in agricultural prices benefits poor urban consumers but hurts poor rural producers, while a rise yields the converse. Poor countries have argued that they need to be able to use import protection and/or price support policies to protect themselves against volatility in world agricultural prices in order to dampen these effects. In this paper, we explore this dilemma in a CGE model of India that uses a new social accounting matrix (SAM) developed at the Indira Ghandi Institute of Development Research (IGIDR) in Mumbai. The SAM includes extensive disaggregation of agricultural activities, commodity markets, labor markets, and rural and urban households. This SAM includes 115 commodities, 48 labor types and 352 types of households, (classified by social group, income class, region, and urban/rural). The CGE model based on this SAM can be used to explore the linkages between changes in world prices of agriculture and the incomes of poor rural and urban households, capturing rural-urban linkages in both commodity and factor markets. The results indicate that the inclusion of linkages between rural and urban labor markets is necessary to fully explore, and potentially eliminate, the dilemma. A fall in agricultural prices hurts agricultural producers, lowers wages and/or employment of rural labor, and in some cases spills over into urban labor markets, depressing wages and incomes of poor urban households as well. In these cases both rural and urban poverty increases. The paper explores the strength of these commodity and factor market linkages, and the potential spillover effects of policies affecting agricultural prices.
|Date of creation:||Jun 2008|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Gen. A. K. Vaidya Marg, Goregaon (E), Mumbai 400065|
Phone: (022) 840 0919/20/21
Fax: (022) 840 2752/2026
Web page: http://www.igidr.ac.in
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Thomas W. Hertel & Jeffrey J. Reimer, 2006.
"Predicting the Poverty Impacts of Trade Reform,"
QA - Rivista dell'Associazione Rossi-Doria,
Associazione Rossi Doria, issue 2, May.
- Thomas Hertel & Jeffrey Reimer, 2005. "Predicting the poverty impacts of trade reform," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 377-405.
- Hertel, Thomas W. & Reimer, Jeffrey J., 2004. "Predicting the poverty impacts of trade reform," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3444, The World Bank.
- Thomas W. Hertel & Roman Keeney & Maros Ivanic & L. Alan Winters, 2015. "Why Isn't the Doha Development Agenda more Poverty Friendly?," World Scientific Book Chapters,in: Non-Tariff Barriers, Regionalism and Poverty Essays in Applied International Trade Analysis, chapter 18, pages 375-391 World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
- Thomas W. Hertel & Roman Keeney & Maros Ivanic & L. Alan Winters, 2009. "Why Isn't the Doha Development Agenda more Poverty Friendly?," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(4), pages 543-559, November.
- Hertel, Thomas & Keeney, Roman & Ivanic, Maros & Winters, Alan, 2007. "Why Isn’t the Doha Development Agenda More Poverty Friendly?," GTAP Working Papers 2292, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
- Petia Topalova, 2007. "Trade Liberalization, Poverty and Inequality: Evidence from Indian Districts," NBER Chapters,in: Globalization and Poverty, pages 291-336 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Petia Topalova, 2005. "Trade Liberalization, Poverty And Inequality: Evidence From Indian Districts," Working Papers id:222, eSocialSciences.
- Petia Topalova, 2005. "Trade Liberalization, Poverty, and Inequality: Evidence from Indian Districts," NBER Working Papers 11614, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Steve Boucher & J. Edward Taylor, 2006. "Subsistence Response to Market Shocks," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(2), pages 279-291.
- Dyer, George A. & Boucher, Steve & Taylor, J. Edward, 2005. "Subsistence Response to Market Shocks," Working Papers 190906, University of California, Davis, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
- Ravallion, Martin & Lokshin, Michael, 2004. "Gainers and losers from trade reform in Morocco," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3368, The World Bank.
- A. Ganesh-Kumar & Manoj Panda & Mary E. Burfisher, 2006. "Reforms in Indian Agro-processing and Agriculture Sectors in the Context of Unilateral and Multilateral Trade Agreements," Trade Working Papers 22408, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
- 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.
- Devaragan, Shantayanan & Lewis, Jeffrey D. & Robinson, Sherman, 1990. "Policy lessons from trade-focused, two-sector models," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 625-657. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)