Skip to Main Navigation

Would freeing up world trade reduce poverty and inequality the vexed role of agricultural distortions (Inglês)

Trade policy reforms in recent decades have sharply reduced the distortions that were harming agriculture in developing countries, yet global trade in farm products continues to be far more distorted than trade in nonfarm goods. Those distortions reduce some forms of poverty and inequality but worsen others, so the net effects are unclear without empirical modeling. This paper summarizes a series of new economy-wide global and national empirical studies that focus on the net effects of the remaining distortions to world merchandise trade on poverty and inequality globally and in various developing countries. The global LINKAGE model results suggest that removing those remaining distortions would reduce international inequality, largely by boosting net farm incomes and raising real wages for unskilled workers in developing countries, and would reduce the number of poor people worldwide by 3 percent. The analysis based on the Global Trade Analysis Project model for a sample of 15 countries, and nine stand-alone national case studies, all point to larger reductions in poverty, especially if only the non-poor are subjected to increased income taxation to compensate for the loss of trade tax revenue.


  • Autor

    Anderson, Kym Cockburn, John Martin, Will

  • Data do documento


  • TIpo de documento

    Documento de trabalho sobre pesquisa de políticas

  • No. do relatório


  • Nº do volume


  • Total Volume(s)


  • País


  • Região

    Regiões Mundiais,

  • Data de divulgação


  • Disclosure Status


  • Nome do documento

    Would freeing up world trade reduce poverty and inequality ? the vexed role of agricultural distortions

  • Palavras-chave

    Poverty & Inequality;extent of income inequality;information and communication technology;contribution to poverty reduction;national household survey data;country case study;Trade Policies;Trade Policy;trade tax revenue;multilateral trade reform;extremely poor people;trade policy reform;farm household;reduction in poverty;form of poverty;benefits of trade;direct income tax;full trade liberalization;global trade reform;model result;merchandise trade;climate change studies;labor market reform;elasticity of substitution;extent of poverty;barriers to mobility;global trade liberalization;barriers to migration;impact on poverty;degree of poverty;impact of reforms;elimination of trade;consumer price index;rural human capital;owners of capital;domestic policy instruments;poverty headcount index;distribution of household;Political Economy Analysis;unilateral trade liberalization;primarily due;economies of scale;quantity of exports;terms of trade;welfare of individuals;source income;producer price increase;Computable General Equilibrium;global economic welfare;farm trade policy;real government spending;source of income;difference in income;loss in revenue;incidence of poverty;global financial crisis;crop and livestock;labor market characteristic;merchandise trade barriers;social accounting matrix;free global trade;international capital flow;global simulation model;cost of living;partial equilibrium analysis;multilateral trade agreement;alleviation of hunger;national poverty headcount;increase in inequality;country of citizenship;multilateral trade negotiation;income tax policy;effect of price;increase in prices;price distortion;weighted average;unskilled worker;global models;farm income;global reform;extreme poverty;empirical study;poverty alleviation;national model;household income;staple food;urban agricultural policy;border price;global poverty;poor household;food price;net effect;factor market;export demand;comparative static;poverty effect;domestic reform;global economy;full liberalization;import tariff;present study;goods trade;global inequality;global liberalization;agricultural incentive;national studies;poverty alleviate;empirical findings;empirical model;farm product;poverty reducing;national reform;rural area;aggregate employment;urban poor;poverty increase;large subsidy;agricultural product;Agricultural Trade;fiscal balance;increased income;agricultural price;global welfare;real wage;closure rule;unskilled wage;Rural Poor;higher-income countries;poverty elasticity;urban household;Learning and Innovation Credit;poverty impact;household consumption;unilateral reform;International Trade;beneficial impact;empirical evidence;richer countries;world food;income transfer;farm policy;agricultural good;household groups;goods market;market access;import barrier;land market;equal weight;price change;world price;public good;econometric analysis;average change;reform scenario;customs revenue;nonfarm income;open access;development policy;government budget;trade taxation;investment behavior;trade negotiators;research network;farm good;external trade;study including;behavioral assumptions;tax income;tariff decreases;applied tariff;national economy;individual income;increase growth;international movement;domestic policies;empirical literature;endogenous growth;Emerging economies;emerging economy;tradable good;Poverty Analysis;population size;policy reasons;food consumer;agricultural industry;nominal rate;import restriction;export tax;import competition;border measure;transfer mechanism;agricultural land;farm labor;product market;real gdp;world distribution;constant return;increase poverty;dynamic component;tariff revenue;efficiency gain;agricultural producer;Social Welfare;commodity market;broad consensus;tariff protection;social program;global income;compensatory policy;export price;average welfare;consumer product;duty-free access;farm size;processed food;data limitation;international mobility;labor income;real income;relative poverty



Versão oficial do documento (pode conter assinaturas, etc.)

  • PDF oficial
  • TXT*
  • Total Downloads** :
  • Download Stats
  • *A versão do texto é um OCR incorreto e está incluído unicamente em benefício de usuários com conectividade lenta.