Table 18 CGE estimated real income effect of multilateral trade reform and transportation cost
declines (billions of US dollars, equivalent variation measure)
|
Country/region |
Reversion to Uruguay Round tariffs |
Reversion to Tokyo Round tariffs |
Reversion of transportation costs | ||||||
|
Efficiency |
Terms of |
Overall |
Efficiency |
Terms of |
Overall |
Efficiency |
Terms of |
Overall | |
|
Australia |
-1.1 |
0.5 |
-0.6 |
-3.7 |
1.8 |
-1.9 |
-3.0 |
-1.8 |
-4.8 |
|
Brazil |
-3.5 |
1.5 |
-2.0 |
-9.3 |
2.4 |
-6.9 |
-2.2 |
-0.5 |
-2.7 |
|
Canada |
-2.1 |
0.0 |
-2.1 |
-7.9 |
0.9 |
-7.0 |
-2.5 |
2.9 |
0.3 |
|
China |
-1.2 |
5.9 |
4.7 |
-5.0 |
3.8 |
-1.2 |
-9.9 |
-9.2 |
-19.1 |
|
EU-15 |
-21.9 |
1.2 |
-20.7 |
-31.6 |
1.3 |
-30.3 |
-58.8 |
-6.9 |
-65.7 |
|
Hong Kong |
-0.0 |
-0.9 |
-0.9 |
-0.0 |
-2.0 |
-2.0 |
-1.6 |
-0.5 |
-2.1 |
|
India |
-5.0 |
3.7 |
-1.3 |
-20.9 |
12.1 |
-8.8 |
-3.1 |
-2.6 |
-5.7 |
|
Indonesia |
-5.0 |
1.9 |
-3.0 |
-7.2 |
1.7 |
-5.6 |
-1.8 |
-0.4 |
-2.3 |
|
Japan |
-1.2 |
3.0 |
1.8 |
-2.3 |
2.8 |
0.5 |
-11.5 |
0.6 |
-10.8 |
|
Korea |
-1.6 |
2.7 |
1.1 |
-8.3 |
6.1 |
-2.2 |
-5.8 |
0.2 |
-5.6 |
|
Malaysia |
-1.1 |
-3.3 |
-4.4 |
-1.6 |
-5.3 |
-7.0 |
-1.9 |
0.4 |
-1.5 |
|
Mexico |
-20.3 |
6.7 |
-13.6 |
-30.9 |
8.1 |
-22.9 |
-2.2 |
1.8 |
-0.4 |
|
Philippines |
-1.4 |
0.5 |
-0.9 |
-1.8 |
0.2 |
-1.5 |
-1.1 |
-0.0 |
-1.1 |
|
Singapore |
-0.7 |
-1.2 |
-1.9 |
-2.7 |
-1.0 |
-3.8 |
-1.7 |
1.4 |
-0.3 |
|
Taiwan |
-0.0 |
0.0 |
-0.0 |
-0.2 |
-1.1 |
-1.3 |
-3.9 |
-2.1 |
-5.9 |
|
Thailand |
-2.9 |
0.7 |
-2.2 |
-7.4 |
0.8 |
-6.6 |
-1.9 |
-0.3 |
-2.2 |
|
Venezuela |
-0.5 |
-0.6 |
-1.1 |
-0.8 |
-0.8 |
-1.6 |
-0.5 |
0.3 |
-0.2 |
|
United States |
-2.1 |
-11.6 |
-13.7 |
-5.0 |
-13.3 |
-18.2 |
-22.8 |
1.9 |
-20.9 |
|
Rest of world |
-2.4 |
-11.1 |
-13.5 |
-4.3 |
-19.4 |
-23.7 |
2.0 |
14.7 |
16.7 |
|
Total |
-74.1 |
-152.0 |
-134.3 | ||||||
Notes: All simulations are run using Gilbert's CGE model and the GTAP7 database, which has a base year of 2004.The results are comparative static
estimates—they represent only the allocation effects of a change in tariff levels and do not capture other channels, such as productivty effects.
The overall real income effect is measured using an equivalent variation measure, and is decomposed into terms-of-trade and allocative efficiency
components. The results should be interpreted as the annual real income gain or loss. To approximate a total loss over a long period of time, the figures
can be treated as a discounted annuity. For example, the total loss to the United States from an undoing of the Tokyo Round tariff reductions would
be approximately $912 billion—that is, $18.2 billion loss annually discounted to perpetuity at 2 percent. All measures are relative to a baseline of 2004,
adjusted to reflect preferential agreements with the United States.
Source: Gilbert (2009) calculations using GTAP7 database.
34
More intriguing information
1. Impact of Ethanol Production on U.S. and Regional Gasoline Prices and On the Profitability of U.S. Oil Refinery Industry2. Keynesian Dynamics and the Wage-Price Spiral:Estimating a Baseline Disequilibrium Approach
3. Integrating the Structural Auction Approach and Traditional Measures of Market Power
4. The name is absent
5. The name is absent
6. The Role of Immigration in Sustaining the Social Security System: A Political Economy Approach
7. Restricted Export Flexibility and Risk Management with Options and Futures
8. The name is absent
9. Philosophical Perspectives on Trustworthiness and Open-mindedness as Professional Virtues for the Practice of Nursing: Implications for he Moral Education of Nurses
10. Backpropagation Artificial Neural Network To Detect Hyperthermic Seizures In Rats