IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/330899.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

GTAP at Work in Denmark - Quantifying and Qualifying a Political Debate

Author

Listed:
  • Frandsen, Soren E.
  • Jensen, Hans G.

Abstract

In March 1999 the Danish Minister of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries invited key policy makers from the food industry, farmers' organisations, consumer organisations and labour unions in Denmark to discuss the future perspectives for the Danish agricultural and fisheries sectors in a national and global context. In order to qualify and quantify the debate, the Danish Institute of Agricultural and Fisheries Economics (SJFI) was called upon to participate in the discussions and to assess the future development of the Danish agricultural sectors with the aim of identifying challenges and opportunities. SJFI was also asked to analyse the economic consequences of specific policy scenarios, including the impact of higher national standards in relation to environmental protection, animal welfare and food security. This paper describes how the SJFI team has put GTAP to work in a specific policy context demonstrating the applicability of computable general equilibrium (CGE) models for practical policy advise purposes. It is concluded that such model-based analysis - in spite of its limitations - has influenced the political debate in Denmark and that the strength of the CGE approach lies not so much in the exact numerical results, but rather in the focus on important economic mechanisms and linkages, thereby providing a structured analytical framework. Moreover, the Danish experience illustrates that using more formal analytical approaches such as CGE modelling contributes to a more focused, disciplined and hence a more constructive policy debate

Suggested Citation

  • Frandsen, Soren E. & Jensen, Hans G., 2001. "GTAP at Work in Denmark - Quantifying and Qualifying a Political Debate," Conference papers 330899, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:330899
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/330899/files/2487.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brander, James & Krugman, Paul, 1983. "A 'reciprocal dumping' model of international trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3-4), pages 313-321, November.
    2. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1995. "The Politics of Free-Trade Agreements," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 667-690, September.
    3. Paul Brenton & Miriam Manchin, 2014. "Making EU Trade Agreements Work: The Role of Rules of Origin," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: INTERNATIONAL TRADE, DISTRIBUTION AND DEVELOPMENT Empirical Studies of Trade Policies, chapter 14, pages 299-313, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Hoekman, Bernard, 1993. "Rules of Origin for Goods and Services: Conceptual Issues and Economic Considerations," CEPR Discussion Papers 821, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. Victor Ginsburgh & Michiel Keyzer, 2002. "The Structure of Applied General Equilibrium Models," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262571579, April.
    6. Davies, Stephen & Lyons, Bruce, 1996. "Industrial Organization in the European Union: Structure, Strategy, and the Competitive Mechanism," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198289739.
    7. Smith, Alasdair & Venables, Anthony J., 1988. "Completing the internal market in the European Community : Some industry simulations," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1501-1525, September.
    8. Patrick A. Messerlin, 2001. "Measuring the Costs of Protection in Europe: European Commercial Policy in the 2000s," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 102, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Flôres Junior, Renato Galvão & Watanuki, Masakazu, 2006. "Is China a Northern Partner to Mercosul?," FGV EPGE Economics Working Papers (Ensaios Economicos da EPGE) 617, EPGE Brazilian School of Economics and Finance - FGV EPGE (Brazil).
    2. Francois, Joseph & Nelson, Douglas & Pelkmans-Balaoing, Annette, 2008. "Endogenous Protection in General Equilibrium: Estimating Political Weights in the EU," CEPR Discussion Papers 6979, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Nathalie Jorzik & Frank Mueller‐Langer, 2020. "Multilateral stability and efficiency of trade agreements: A network formation approach," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(2), pages 355-370, February.
    4. Bernard Hoekman & Stefano Inama, 2017. "Rules of Origin as Non-Tariff Measures: Towards Greater Regulatory Convergence," RSCAS Working Papers 2017/45, European University Institute.
    5. Anderson, Simon P. & Schmitt, Nicolas & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 1995. "Who benefits from antidumping legislation?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3-4), pages 321-337, May.
    6. Baldwin, Richard E. & Forslid, Rikard, 2000. "Trade liberalisation and endogenous growth: A q-theory approach," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 497-517, April.
    7. Taran Fæhn, 2002. "The Qualitative and Quantitative Significance of Non-Tariff Barriers: An ERP study of Norway," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 35-57.
    8. Baldwin, Richard E. & Seghezza, Elena, 1996. "The New Growth Theory: Its Logic and Trade Policy Implications," 1996: Implications of the New Growth Theory to Agricultural Trade Research and Trade Policy Conference, December 1996, Washington DC 50862, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    9. Ibarra-Yunez, Alejandro, 2003. "Spaghetti regionalism or strategic foreign trade: some evidence for Mexico," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 567-584, December.
    10. Joseph Francois & Bernard Hoekman & Miriam Manchin, 2006. "Preference Erosion and Multilateral Trade Liberalization," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 20(2), pages 197-216.
    11. Marco Fugazza & Frédéric Robert-Nicoud, 2014. "The “Emulator Effect” of the Uruguay Round on US Regionalism," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 1049-1078, November.
    12. Stoyanov, Andrey & Yildiz, Halis Murat, 2015. "Preferential versus multilateral trade liberalization and the role of political economy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 140-164.
    13. Caroline L. Freund, 1998. "Multilateralism and the endogenous formation of PTAs," International Finance Discussion Papers 614, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    14. Michele Cincera, 2004. "Impact of market entry and exit on EU productivity and growth performance," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/921, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    15. Hartman, Darcy A. & Henderson, Dennis R. & Sheldon, Ian M., 1993. "A Cross-Section Analysis Of Intra-Industry Trade In The U.S. Processed Food And Beverage Sectors," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 24(1), pages 1-9, February.
    16. Pokrivcak, Jan, 2007. "Economics and Political Economy of Regional Trade Agreements," Working Papers 7286, TRADEAG - Agricultural Trade Agreements.
    17. Ben Ferrett & Ian Wooton, 2010. "Competing for a duopoly: international trade and tax competition," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 43(3), pages 776-794, August.
    18. Lee, Hiro & van der Mensbrugghe, Dominique, 2006. "Deep integration and its impacts on non-members: EU enlargement and East Asia," MPRA Paper 82286, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Kala Krishna, 2005. "Understanding Rules of Origin," NBER Working Papers 11150, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Shiro Takeda, 2010. "A computable general equilibrium analysis of the welfare effects of trade liberalization under different market structures," International Review of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1), pages 75-93.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:330899. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gtpurus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.