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. Financial Markets and International Risk Sharing2. he Virtual Playground: an Educational Virtual Reality Environment for Evaluating Interactivity and Conceptual Learning
3. Applications of Evolutionary Economic Geography
4. Connectionism, Analogicity and Mental Content
5. Nurses' retention and hospital characteristics in New South Wales, CHERE Discussion Paper No 52
6. THE INTERNATIONAL OUTLOOK FOR U.S. TOBACCO
7. Political Rents, Promotion Incentives, and Support for a Non-Democratic Regime
8. Name Strategy: Its Existence and Implications
9. The Effects of Attendance on Academic Performance: Panel Data Evidence for Introductory Microeconomics
10. SME'S SUPPORT AND REGIONAL POLICY IN EU - THE NORTE-LITORAL PORTUGUESE EXPERIENCE