Trade policy and redistribution when preferences are non-homothetic
This paper compares redistribution through trade restrictions versus domestic lump-sum transfers. When preferences are non-homothetic, even domestic lump-sum transfers affect relative prices. Thus, contrary to the conventional wisdom, domestic lump-sum transfers are not necessarily superior to distortionary trade policy. The paper develops this argument in the context of the food export bans imposed by many developing countries in the late 2000s.
|Date of creation:||14 Mar 2017|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 1818 H Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20433|
Phone: (202) 477-1234
Web page: http://www.worldbank.org/
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.:
- Everett E. Hagen, 1958. "An Economic Justification of Protectionism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 72(4), pages 496-514.
- Porto, Guido G., 2006.
"Using survey data to assess the distributional effects of trade policy,"
Journal of International Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 140-160, September.
- Guido G. Porto, 2003. "Using survey data to assess the distributional effects of trade policy," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3137, The World Bank.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:8005. 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: (Roula I. Yazigi)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.