IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/331680.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The effect of selected international developments on the Greek economy

Author

Listed:
  • Neofotistos, George C.
  • Tsigas, Marinos E.

Abstract

We use a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model, based on the GTAP framework, to reveal how certain linkages and interactions affect Greece and neighboring countries, in a global context. In particular, the economy-wide effects on the Greek economy of a) China’s economic growth, b) Turkey’s economic growth, and c) the import tariff removals concomitant to the recent EU accession of Romania and Bulgaria, have been studied. Our analysis is based on aggregated data and parameters derived from the GTAP v6 database. The base year is 2001. We aggregated the 57 GTAP industries into 32 industries, 29 of which represent merchandise trade sectors. The analysis comprises five primary factors: land, unskilled labor, skilled labor, natural resources, and capital. Our findings suggest that China’s natural resources’ factor growth yields a positive impact on Greece, whereas growth in China’s capital, skilled and unskilled labor factors yields negative impacts to the Greek economy (although the overall sum is positive). Similar impact is manifested in the economies of South-European countries (with positive overall sum) and Bulgaria, Turkey and Albania (with negative overall sum for each of these countries). France, Germany, Rest of Europe, NAFTA, and Rest of Asia experience positive impacts only (with the exception of China’s natural resources factor growth on the UK economy and of China’s land factor growth on the NAFTA economies). Regarding specific Greek sectors, the Greek economy declines in 9 sectors, although 22 Greek sectors expand. Regarding Turkey, its economic growth has a positive impact on Greece, most of the European countries, and the rest of the world, with the exception of North East Asia and South Asia regions, which experience a negative impact. Overall, 18 Greek sectors expand. The economic impact of import barrier removals, following Romania’s and Bulgaria’s EU accession, on bilateral trade, income, welfare, and total imports/exports, on Greece, EU24 (that is, EU25 minus Greece), and the Rest of the World (ROW), show positive overall welfare effects, with total Greek exports increasing by 0.25% (due to exports to Romania and Bulgaria), total Greek imports increasing by 0.54%, and large output effects for Bulgaria and Romania.

Suggested Citation

  • Neofotistos, George C. & Tsigas, Marinos E., 2008. "The effect of selected international developments on the Greek economy," Conference papers 331680, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:331680
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/331680/files/3798.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Harris, Richard, 1984. "Applied General Equilibrium Analysis of Small Open Economies with Scale Economies and Imperfect Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(5), pages 1016-1032, December.
    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. Fernand Martin, 1991. "Measuring the Impact of Free Trade: Local Analysis versus Regional and National Models," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 14(1), pages 1-14, April.
    2. Y. Qiang, 1999. "CGE Modelling and Australian Economics," Economics Discussion / Working Papers 99-04, The University of Western Australia, Department of Economics.
    3. Don Fullerton & Gilbert E. Metcalf, 2002. "Environmental Controls, Scarcity Rents, and Pre-existing Distortions," Chapters, in: Lawrence H. Goulder (ed.), Environmental Policy Making in Economies with Prior Tax Distortions, chapter 26, pages 504-522, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. repec:lic:licosd:11702 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Lucy Rees & Rod Tyers, 2004. "On the Robustness of Short Run Gains from Trade Reform," CEPR Discussion Papers 474, Centre for Economic Policy Research, Research School of Economics, Australian National University.
    6. Lee, Hiro & van der Mensbrugghe, Dominique, 2005. "The impact of the US safeguard measures on Northeast Asian producers: General equilibrium assessments," MPRA Paper 82288, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Jaime de Melo & David Tarr, 2015. "VERs under imperfect competition and foreign direct investment: A case study of the US–Japan auto VER," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Modeling Developing Countries' Policies in General Equilibrium, chapter 22, pages 461-483, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Chatti Rim, 2003. "A CGE Assessment of FTA Between Tunisia and the EU Under Oligopolistic Market Structures," Review of Middle East Economics and Finance, De Gruyter, vol. 1(2), pages 1-30, August.
    9. Cororaton, Caesar B., 1994. "Structural Adjustment Policy Experiments: The Use of Philippine CGE Models," Discussion Papers DP 1994-03, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    10. Funke, Michael & Ruhwedel, Ralf, 2003. "Trade, product variety and welfare: a quantitative assessment for the transition economies in Central and Eastern Europe," BOFIT Discussion Papers 17/2003, Bank of Finland Institute for Emerging Economies (BOFIT).
    11. Aileen J. Thompson, 1999. "Import Competition and Market Power: Canadian Evidence," Carleton Economic Papers 99-14, Carleton University, Department of Economics, revised Mar 2000.
    12. Huiwen Lai & Daniel Trefler, 2002. "The Gains from Trade with Monopolistic Competition: Specification, Estimation, and Mis-Specification," NBER Working Papers 9169, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Konan, Denise Eby & Maskus, Keith E., 2006. "Quantifying the impact of services liberalization in a developing country," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 142-162, October.
    14. Asano, Akihito & Tyers, Rod, 2015. "Third Arrow Reforms and Japan’s Economic Performance," Conference papers 332617, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    15. Markusen, James R. & Rutherford, Thomas F. & Hunter, Linda, 1995. "Trade liberalization in a multinational-dominated industry," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(1-2), pages 95-117, February.
    16. James Markusen, 2023. "Incorporating Theory-Consistent Endogenous Markups into Applied General-Equilibrium Models," Journal of Global Economic Analysis, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, vol. 8(2), pages 60-99, December.
    17. Alexander, Patrick D. & Keay, Ian, 2019. "Responding to the First Era of Globalization: Canadian Trade Policy, 1870–1913," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 79(3), pages 826-861, September.
    18. Andreas PEICHL, 2008. "The Benefits of Linking CGE and Microsimulation Models - Evidence from a Flat Tax analysis," EcoMod2008 23800106, EcoMod.
    19. Boussard, Jean-Marc & Gerard, Francoise & Piketty, Marie Gabrielle & Ayouz, Mourad & Voituriez, Tancrede, 2006. "Endogenous risk and long run effects of liberalization in a global analysis framework," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 457-475, May.
    20. Chapda Nana, Guy & Larue, Bruno & Gervais, Jean-Philippe, 2012. "Regional integration and dynamic adjustments: Evidence from gross national product functions for Canada and the United States," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 246-264.
    21. Robert C. Feenstra, 2007. "Globalization and Its Impact on Labour," wiiw Working Papers 44, The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, wiiw.

    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:331680. 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.