IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mie/wpaper/489.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Computational Analysis of Multilateral Trade Liberalization in the Uruguay Round and Doha Development Round

Author

Listed:
  • Drusilla K. Brown

    (Tufts University)

  • Alan V. Deardorff

    (University of Michigan)

  • Robert M Stern

    (University of Michigan)

Abstract

We have used the Michigan Model of World Production and Trade to simulate the economic effects of the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations completed in 1993-94 on the major industrialized and developing countries/regions. We estimate that the Uruguay Round negotiations increased global economic welfare by $73.0 billion. The developed countries overall have an estimated welfare gain of $53.8 billion, and the developing countries an estimated welfare increase of $19.2 billion. We have also simulated the effects of assumed 33 percent reductions in trade barriers in the ongoing Doha Development Round. There is an estimated increase in global welfare of $574.0 billion. There is a global welfare decline of $3.1 billion from agricultural liberalization due primarily to the assumed reductions in export subsidies. There are global welfare gains of $163.4 billion from reductions in manufactures tariffs and $413.7 billion from reductions in services barriers. All of the countries/regions covered in the Michigan Model show overall welfare increases, with the largest absolute gains going to the developed countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Drusilla K. Brown & Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M Stern, 2002. "Computational Analysis of Multilateral Trade Liberalization in the Uruguay Round and Doha Development Round," Working Papers 489, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
  • Handle: RePEc:mie:wpaper:489
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://fordschool.umich.edu/rsie/workingpapers/Papers476-500/r489.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas W. Hertel & Bernard M. Hoekman & Will Martin, 2002. "Developing Countries and a New Round of WTO Negotiations," World Bank Research Observer, World Bank Group, vol. 17(1), pages 113-140.
    2. Harrison, W Jill & Pearson, K R, 1996. "Computing Solutions for Large General Equilibrium Models Using GEMPACK," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 9(2), pages 83-127, May.
    3. Brown, Drusilla K & Stern, Robert M, 2001. "Measurement and Modeling of the Economic Effects of Trade and Investment Barriers in Services," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(2), pages 262-286, May.
    4. Hertel, Thomas W. & Will Martin, 1999. "Would Developing Countries Gain from Inclusion of Manufactures in the WTO Negotiations?," GTAP Working Papers 397, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    5. J. Michael Finger & Julio J. Nogués, 2002. "The Unbalanced Uruguay Round Outcome: The New Areas in Future WTO Negotiations," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(3), pages 321-340, March.
    6. Wolfgang F. Stolper & Paul A. Samuelson, 1941. "Protection and Real Wages," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 58-73.
    7. Bernard Hoekman, 2000. "The next round of services negotiations: identifying priorities and options," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue Jul, pages 31-52.
    8. Francois, Joseph & McDonald, Brad & Nordström, Håkan, 1996. "A User's Guide to Uruguay Round Assessments," CEPR Discussion Papers 1410, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. Thomas W. Hertel, 2000. "Potential gains from reducing trade barriers in manufacturing, services and agriculture," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue Jul, pages 77-104.
    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. John Whalley, 2004. "Assessing the Benefits to Developing Countries of Liberalisation in Services Trade," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(8), pages 1223-1253, August.
    2. Frank Ackerman, "undated". "05-01 "The Shrinking Gains from Trade: A Critical Assessment of Doha Round Projections"," GDAE Working Papers 05-01, GDAE, Tufts University.
    3. Gary Clyde Hufbauer & Ben Goodrich, 2003. "More Pain, More Gain: Politics and Economics of Eliminating Tariffs," Policy Briefs PB03-08, Peterson Institute for International Economics.

    More about this item

    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:mie:wpaper:489. 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: (FSPP Webmaster). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/riumius.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.