IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/331679.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evaluating the impact of trade agreement for Central America: Does trade integration improve poverty and inequality?

Author

Listed:
  • Giordano, Paolo
  • Watanuki, Masakazu

Abstract

In recent years, trade and poverty have received enormous attention in Latin America and elsewhere. In Central America, this issue was culminated in the CAFTA negotiations and its subsequent ratification processes. Despite impressive achievements in the external fronts in the 1990s, the speed of improvement in poverty has been slow. High and persistent inequality remained unchanged. Central America is now engaged in the negotiations of a biregional trade agreement with the European Union. This study evaluates the impact of this trade agreement. We apply a sequential, top-down, CGE-microsimulation approach. The simulation results show that the agreement will be a favorable option. It is welfare-improving and unambiguously expansionary. Agriculture and agro-industries will be big winners. Central American will strengthen their comparative advantage in agriculture. But the agreement has little effects in enhancing export diversification of manufactured sectors, changing the economic structure and strengthening technology-intensive industries. The microsimulation analysis shows the agreement will have pro-poor and, to a lesser extent, pro-equality effects. Income generation process via labor market is the determinant factor to reduce poverty. Trade agreement will generate the positive impact on labor market for low- and semi-skilled workers—employment creation, wages increases or both. The aggregate inequality declines but, may not necessarily fall in all regions. In coordination with other domestic policies, Central America should well consider liberalization process in agriculture, which will be the focal point of the negotiations. Improved market access is the key of making trade work. But, export growth does not necessarily guarantee to reduce poverty. Lessons from CAFTA process should be fully capitalized. When all of these work, trade will play as a powerful catalyst for poverty reduction, and the agreement will truly give a window of opportunities for the bloc.

Suggested Citation

  • Giordano, Paolo & Watanuki, Masakazu, 2008. "Evaluating the impact of trade agreement for Central America: Does trade integration improve poverty and inequality?," Conference papers 331679, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:331679
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/331679/files/3796.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. L Alan Winters, 2004. "Trade Liberalisation and Economic Performance: An Overview," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(493), pages 4-21, February.
    2. L. ALAN WINTERS & NEIL McCULLOCH & ANDREW McKAY, 2015. "Trade Liberalization and Poverty: The Evidence So Far," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Non-Tariff Barriers, Regionalism and Poverty Essays in Applied International Trade Analysis, chapter 14, pages 271-314, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Wong, Kar-yiu, 1986. "Are international trade and factor mobility substitutes?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1-2), pages 25-43, August.
    4. By Gunnar Jonsson & Arvind Subramanian, 2001. "Dynamic Gains from Trade: Evidence from South Africa," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 48(1), pages 1-8.
    5. Marc J. Melitz, 2003. "The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(6), pages 1695-1725, November.
    6. Wade, Robert Hunter, 2004. "Is Globalization Reducing Poverty and Inequality?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 567-589, April.
    7. Xavier Sala-i-Martin, 2002. "15 Years of New Growth Economics : What Have we Learnt?," Journal Economía Chilena (The Chilean Economy), Central Bank of Chile, vol. 5(2), pages 5-15, August.
    8. Elhanan Helpman & Marc J. Melitz & Stephen R. Yeaple, 2004. "Export Versus FDI with Heterogeneous Firms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(1), pages 300-316, March.
    9. Kim, Euysung, 2000. "Trade liberalization and productivity growth in Korean manufacturing industries: price protection, market power, and scale efficiency," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 55-83, June.
    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. John Cockburn & Erwin Corong & Bernard Decaluwé & Ismaël Fofana & Véronique Robichaud, 2010. "The Gender and Poverty Impacts of Trade Liberalization in Senegal," Cahiers de recherche 1013, CIRPEE.
    2. Tugores, Juan, 2008. "Regional integration and public policy. Evaluation of the European experience and possible implications for Latin American integration," Estudios y Perspectivas – Sede Subregional de la CEPAL en México 4879, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    3. L. Alan Winters, 2014. "Globalization, Infrastructure, and Inclusive Growth," Trade Working Papers 23974, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    4. Admasu Shiferaw & Degol Hailu, 2016. "Job creation and trade in manufactures: industry-level analysis across countries," IZA Journal of Labor & Development, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 5(1), pages 1-36, December.
    5. Ousmanou Njikam & John Cockburn, 2011. "Trade liberalization and productivity growth:firm-level evidence from Cameroon," Journal of Developing Areas, Tennessee State University, College of Business, vol. 44(2), pages 279-302, January-M.
    6. Guzmán Ourens, 2020. "The long-term impact of trade with firm heterogeneity," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 156(4), pages 887-919, November.
    7. Antonio Martuscelli & Michael Gasiorek, 2019. "Regional Integration And Poverty: A Review Of The Transmission Channels And The Evidence," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 431-457, April.
    8. Giordano, Paolo & Li, Kun, 2012. "An Updated Assessment of the Trade and Poverty Nexus in Latin America," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 4209, Inter-American Development Bank.
    9. L. Alan Winters & Antonio Martuscelli, 2014. "Trade Liberalization and Poverty: What Have We Learned in a Decade?," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 493-512, October.
    10. Paolo Giordano & Kun Li, 2012. "An Updated Assessment of the Trade and Poverty Nexus in Latin America," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 79119, Inter-American Development Bank.
    11. Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg & Nina Pavcnik, 2007. "Distributional Effects of Globalization in Developing Countries," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 45(1), pages 39-82, March.
    12. Fleming, David A. & Abler, David G., 2013. "Does agricultural trade affect productivity? Evidence from Chilean farms," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 11-17.
    13. BOERMANS, Martijn Adriaan, 2013. "LEARNING-BY-EXPORTING AND DESTINATION EFFECTS: EVIDENCE FROM AFRICAN SMEs," Applied Econometrics and International Development, Euro-American Association of Economic Development, vol. 13(2), pages 149-168.
    14. Joel Hellier & Ekaterina Kalugina, 2015. "Globalization and the working poor," Working Papers 355, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    15. Pinelopi K. Goldberg & Nina Pavcnik, 2004. "Trade, Inequality, and Poverty: What Do We Know? Evidence from Recent Trade Liberalization Episodes in Developing Countries," NBER Working Papers 10593, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Beverly Lapham & Hiroyuki Kasahara, 2005. "Import Protection as Export Destruction," 2005 Meeting Papers 528, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    17. De Masi, G. & Giovannetti, G. & Ricchiuti, G., 2013. "Network analysis to detect common strategies in Italian foreign direct investment," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 392(5), pages 1202-1214.
    18. Elhanan Helpman, 2010. "Labor Market Frictions as a Source of Comparative Advantage, with Implications for Unemployment and Inequality," NBER Working Papers 15764, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Bomin Jiang & Daniel Rigobon & Roberto Rigobon, 2022. "From Just-in-Time, to Just-in-Case, to Just-in-Worst-Case: Simple Models of a Global Supply Chain under Uncertain Aggregate Shocks," IMF Economic Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Monetary Fund, vol. 70(1), pages 141-184, March.
    20. Elhanan Helpman, 2014. "Foreign Trade and Investment: Firm-level Perspectives," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 81(321), pages 1-14, January.

    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:331679. 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.