IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mon/ceddtr/114.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Building and Linking a Microsimulation Model to a CGE Model : the South African Microsimulation Model

Author

Listed:
  • Nicolas Hérault

    (GED, Université Montesquieu-Bordeaux IV)

Abstract

This paper describes the project of building a micro-macro model for South Africa. The aim is to deal with the links between globalisation and poverty or inequality, explaining the effects of trade liberalisation on poverty and inequality. The main issue of interest is the effect of international trade on households (especially their income); some changes may contribute to reduce poverty while other changes could work against the poor. The approach presented in this paper relies on combining a macro-oriented CGE model and a microsimulation model. Combining these two models the microeconomic effects (on poverty and inequality) of a macroeconomic policy (trade liberalisation) can be analysed. The paper gives details about the microsimulation model and the "top-down" approach used to link the microsimulation model and the CGE model. In addition, the methodology discussed is applied to South African data and a selection of preliminary results using this approach are presented and discussed. The main concern regarding poor households is whether the decrease in real (or nominal) earnings for formal low-skilled and skilled workers is offset by the upward trend in formal employment levels. This appears to be the case implying a decrease in poverty due to trade liberalisation. Although whites emerge as the main winners, the increase in inter-group inequality is more than compensated by the decrease in intra-group inequality. Ce papier décrit le projet d’élaboration d’un modèle micro-macro pour l'Afrique du Sud. L’objectif est d’examiner les liens entre la mondialisation et la pauvreté ou l'inégalité, en expliquant les effets de la libéralisation commerciale sur ces deux indicateurs de progrès social. La préoccupation principale concerne l'effet du commerce international sur les ménages (particulièrement, leur revenu), certains changements pouvant contribuer à réduire la pauvreté, tandis que d'autres étant susceptibles d’aggraver les privations. L'approche présentée dans cet article est fondée sue la combinaison d’un modèle CGE orienté-macro et d’un modèle de micro-simulation. En combinant ces deux modèles, les effets micro-économiques (sur la pauvreté et l'inégalité) d'une politique macro-économique (libéralisation commerciale) peuvent être analysés. L’étude spécifie le modèle de micro-simulation et l'approche « top-down », employés pour relier les modèles de micro-simulation et CGE.En outre, la méthodologie discutée est appliquée aux données sud-africaines, et des résultats préliminaires, fondés sur cette approche, sont présentés et discutés. Un élément central de l’analyse concernant les ménages pauvres est d’examiner si la diminution des revenus réels (ou nominaux) des ouvriers qualifiés ou faiblement qualifiés du secteur formel est compensée par la tendance à la hausse de l’emploi formel. L’étude montre que cela semble être le cas, ce qui implique une diminution de la pauvreté due à la libéralisation commerciale. Bien que les bénéficiaires principaux soient les « blancs », l'augmentation de l'inégalité inter-groupes est plus que compensée par la diminution de l'inégalité intra-groupes. (Full text in english)

Suggested Citation

  • Nicolas Hérault, 2005. "Building and Linking a Microsimulation Model to a CGE Model : the South African Microsimulation Model," Documents de travail 114, Groupe d'Economie du Développement de l'Université Montesquieu Bordeaux IV.
  • Handle: RePEc:mon:ceddtr:114
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark Doms & Eric J. Bartelsman, 2000. "Understanding Productivity: Lessons from Longitudinal Microdata," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(3), pages 569-594, September.
    2. François Combarnous & Pascal Labazée, 2002. "Entreprises et emploi en Côte d'Ivoire," Série de recherche 05, Groupe d'Economie du Développement de l'Université Montesquieu Bordeaux IV.
    3. Sanghoon Ahn, 2001. "Firm Dynamics and Productivity Growth: A Review of Micro Evidence from OECD Countries," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 297, OECD Publishing.
    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. Ahmed, Vaqar & O' Donoghue, Cathal, 2007. "CGE-Microsimulation Modelling: A Survey," MPRA Paper 9307, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. François Combarnous & Yves-André Fauré, 2005. "Le dynamisme des micro, petites et moyennes entreprises (MPME). Une étude empirique de 500 unités dans l’Etat de Rio de Janeiro (Brésil)," Documents de travail 115, Groupe d'Economie du Développement de l'Université Montesquieu Bordeaux IV.
    2. Kim, Hyungtai & Ahn, Sanghoon & Ulfarsson, Gudmundur F., 2021. "Impacts of transportation and industrial complexes on establishment-level productivity growth in Korea," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 89-97.
    3. Raphael Bergoeing & Andrés Hernando & Andrea Repetto, 2003. "Idiosyncratic Productivity Shocks and Plant-Level Heterogeneity," Documentos de Trabajo 173, Centro de Economía Aplicada, Universidad de Chile.
    4. Giulio Bottazzi & Giovanni Dosi & Nadia Jacoby & Angelo Secchi & Federico Tamagni, 2010. "Corporate performances and market selection: some comparative evidence," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(6), pages 1953-1996, December.
    5. Daan Freeman & Leon Bettendorf & Harro van Heuvelen & Gerdien Meijerink, 2021. "The contribution of business dynamics to productivity growth in the Netherlands," CPB Discussion Paper 427, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    6. Robert Breunig & Marn-Heong Wong, "undated". "Australia's firm-level productivity -- a new perspective," Australasian Stata Users' Group Meetings 2004 2, Stata Users Group.
    7. Bert Balk, 2003. "The Residual: On Monitoring and Benchmarking Firms, Industries, and Economies with Respect to Productivity," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 5-47, July.
    8. Sanghoon Ahn, 2010. "Does Exporting Raise Productivity? Evidence from Korean Microdata," Working Papers id:3302, eSocialSciences.
    9. Eric Manes, 2009. "Pakistan's Investment Climate : Laying the Foundation for Growth, Volume 2. Annexes," World Bank Publications - Reports 12411, The World Bank Group.
    10. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 51-127, Elsevier.
    11. Giovanni Dosi & Jiasu Lei & Xiaodan Yu, 2013. "Institutional Change and Productivity Growth in China's Manufacturing 1998-2007: the Microeconomics of Creative Restructuring," LEM Papers Series 2013/07, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    12. Sanghoon Ahn, 2004. "Global Competition, Technology Spillovers and Firm Dynamics:," Econometric Society 2004 Far Eastern Meetings 793, Econometric Society.
    13. Giovanni Dosi & Sébastien Lechevalier & Angelo Secchi, 2010. "Interfirm heterogeneity: nature, sources and consequences for industrial dynamics. An introduction," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-00642680, HAL.
    14. Saso Polanec, 2004. "On the Evolution of Size and Productivity in Transition: Evidence from Slovenian Manufacturing Firms," LICOS Discussion Papers 15404, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
    15. Baldwin, John R. Gu, Wulong, 2006. "Competition, Firm Turnover and Productivity Growth," Economic Analysis (EA) Research Paper Series 2006042e, Statistics Canada, Analytical Studies Branch.
    16. Jeong-Dong Lee, 2009. "Industry Dynamics and Productivity Research," TEMEP Discussion Papers 200929, Seoul National University; Technology Management, Economics, and Policy Program (TEMEP), revised Nov 2009.
    17. Grzegorz Go³êbiowski & Piotr Russel, 2015. "Business Dynamics In Poland In Comparison To Selected Countries," GUT FME Conference Publications, in: Blazej Prusak (ed.),ENTERPRISES IN UNSTABLE ECONOMY, chapter 14, pages 182-196, Faculty of Management and Economics, Gdansk University of Technology.
    18. Paloma López-García & Sergio Puente & Ángel Luis Gómez, 2007. "Firm productivity dynamics in Spain," Working Papers 0739, Banco de España.
    19. Joachim Wagner, 2012. "Exports, R&D and productivity: a test of the Bustos-model with German enterprise data," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 32(3), pages 1942-1948.
    20. Alexandre Janiak & Paulo Santos Monteiro, 2011. "Inflation and Welfare in Long‐Run Equilibrium with Firm Dynamics," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(5), pages 795-834, August.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C68 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computable General Equilibrium Models
    • E17 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General Aggregative Models - - - Forecasting and Simulation: Models and Applications
    • O55 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Africa

    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:mon:ceddtr:114. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.