Simon Mevel

More or Less Ambition in the Doha Round: Winners and Losers from Trade Liberalisation with a Development Perspective

What is at stake in the standoff and suspension of the Doha Round of trade talks? What impact would an agreement based on greater or lesser levels of ambition have on developing countries, whose economies are relatively dependent on agriculture? Using the MIRAGE computable general equilibrium model of the global economy, in this article we compare different scenarios for the Doha agricultural and NAMA negotiations, taking real numbers from the proposals on the table from the United States (US) and the European Union (EU) in December 2005. The results for both scenarios demonstrate the high stakes for successful completion of this negotiation given the positions articulated by the countries involved. A cooperative reform outcome by the US and the EU - based on the most ambitious components of their negotiating proposals - delivers noticeably more benefits than an unambitious outcome. We measure the degree of ambition in each scenario by the construction of a Mercantilist Trade Restrictiveness Index and focus the analysis on the impacts on developing countries. Copyright 2007 The Authors Journal compilation 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd .

International Trade and Welfare Effects of Biotechnology Innovations: GM Food Crops in Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, and the Philippines

Purpose – The chapter examines the international welfare effects of biotech crop adoption, based on a transversal literature review and a case study of the introduction of genetically modified (GM) food crops in Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, and the Philippines. Methodology/approach – The analysis is based on (a) a review of lessons from the applied economic literature and (b) simulations using an improved multimarket, multicountry, computable general equilibrium (CGE) model, calibrated with productivity hypotheses formulated with local scientists in the four Asian countries. Findings – Results from the analysis show that, in the absence of trade-related regulations, GM crop adoption generates economic gains for adopting countries and importing non-adopters, that domestic regulations at adopters and especially non-adopters can reduce these gains, and that import regulations in other countries can also affect gains for exporting adopters. The case study illustrates these conclusions, but it also shows that net importers will mostly benefit from adoption in their terms of trade, and that segregation of non-GM crops for export markets can be beneficial if it is not too costly. Research limitations/implications – The use of a CGE model allows for accounting for cross-sectoral effects, and for regulations affecting bilateral trade flows, but it also has a number of limitations. The model used here, like the ones used in the other papers in the literature, is static, based on an aggregated representation of the global economy (GTAP database), and assumes perfect competition. This means that the absolute results of each scenario may not perfectly represent the actual welfare effects engendered by the adoption of biotech crops. Still, what matters here is the comparison of the relative welfare effects across countries and scenarios. The simulations are also done ex-ante, so, even if the model here was calibrated with country-based data, the results do depend on hypothetical assumptions about the performance of the selected technologies. Originality/value of the paper – The chapter aims to illustrate the welfare effects generated by GM crops for adopters, non-adopters, in a segmented and regulated international market. Unlike other papers, the review section provides key transversal lessons from the literature, accounting for results from both partial equilibrium and CGE model studies. The empirical application focuses on four populous Asian countries that have been largely left out of the literature. The model used in the simulation presents a number of improvement from the CGE literature on GM crops, including partial adoption, factor-biased productivity shock in each adopting country, GM labeling regulations modeled as trade filters, and the inclusion of costly non-GM segregation as observed in the international market.

World Oil Price and Biofuels: A General Equilibrium Analysis

The price of oil could play a significant role in influencing the expansion of biofuels. However, this issue has not been fully investigated yet in the literature. Using a global computable general equilibrium model, this study analyzes the impact of oil price on biofuel expansion, and subsequently, on food supply. The study shows that a 65 percent increase in oil price in 2020 from the 2009 level would increase the global biofuel penetration to 5.4 percent in 2020 from 2.4 percent in 2009. A doubling of oil price in 2020 from its baseline level, or a 230 percent increase from the 2009 level, would increase the global biofuel penetration in 2020 to 12.6 percent. The penetration of biofuels is highly sensitive to the substitution possibility between biofuels and their fossil fuel counterparts. The study also shows that aggregate agricultural output drops due to an oil price increase, but the drop is small in major biofuel producing countries as the expansion of biofuels would partially offset the negative impacts of the oil price increase on agricultural outputs. An increase in oil price would reduce global food supply through direct impacts as well as through diversion of food commodities and cropland toward the production of biofuels.

What Can Least Developed Countries Really Expect from the Doha Development Agenda

In November 2001, a new round of multilateral trade negotiations was launched in Doha, Qatar, with a key objective of development. Although the initiative was politically laudable, doubts arise on the economic impacts of the negotiations, in particular on the Least Developed Countries (LDCs). LDCs have very specific economic features: they have been granted numerous trade preferences, their exports are characterized by a high product concentration and many of them are net food importers. Several measures such the Aid-For-Trade initiative and the Duty Free Quota Free (DFQF) regime have been proposed during the negotiations in order to compensate LDCs for potential losses that the multilateral trade liberalization could imply. Using the computable general equilibrium model, MIRAGE, the current proposals as well as more beneficial options for LDCs are examined. All of the implemented scenarios are based on detailed elements of the proposals and are designed at a much disaggregated level using the MAcMap-HS6 v.2 database. As expected, the Doha Development Agenda as defined by May 2008 does not bring significant economic benefits for LDCs and it even hurts most of them in terms of total exports and real income. Therefore, the introduction of a DFQF regime would lead to a better situation for LDCs only if the preferential access is extended to LDCs not only by the OECD members but also by major emerging economies for a very high number of products. LDCs are very diverse and have different interests in terms of sectoral and geographic extension of the DFQF access.

Under what conditions does a carbon tax on fossil fuels stimulate biofuels

A carbon tax is an efficient economic instrument to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide released from fossil fuel burning. Its impacts on production of renewable energy depend on how it is designed -- particularly in the context of the penetration of biofuels into the energy supply mix for road transportation. Using a multi-sector, multi-country computable general equilibrium model, this study shows first that a carbon tax with the entire tax revenue recycled to households through a lump-sum transfer does not stimulate biofuel production significantly, even at relatively high tax rates. This reflects the high cost of carbon dioxide abatement through biofuels substitution, relative to other energy substitution alternatives; in addition, the carbon tax will have negative economy-wide consequences that reduce total demand for all fuels. A combined carbon tax and biofuel subsidy policy, where part of the carbon tax revenue is used to finance a biofuel subsidy, would significantly stimulate market penetration of biofuels. Although the carbon tax and biofuel subsidy policy would cause higher loss in global economic output compared with the carbon tax with lump sum revenue redistribution, the incremental output loss is relatively small.