IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/332382.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comparing PE and CGE Supply-Side Specifications in Models of the Global Food System

Author

Listed:
  • Robinson, Sherman
  • van Meijl, Hans
  • Valin, Hugo
  • Willenbockel, Dirk
  • Fujimori, Shinichiro
  • Masui, Toshihiko
  • Sands, Ron
  • Wise, Marshall
  • Calvin, Katherine
  • Havlik, Petr
  • d'Croz, Daniel Mason
  • Tabeau, Andrzej
  • Kavallari, Aikaterini
  • Schmitz, Christoph
  • Dietrich, Jan
  • von Lampe, Martin

Abstract

This paper compares the theoretical and functional specification of production in partial equilibrium (PE) and computable general equilibrium (CGE) models of the global agricultural and food system included in the AgMIP model comparison study. The two model families differ in their scope—partial versus economywide—and in how they represent technology and the behavior of supply and demand in markets. The CGE models are “deep” structural models in that they explicitly solve the maximization problem of consumers and producers, assuming utility maximization and profit maximization with production/cost functions that include all factor inputs. The PE models divide into two groups on the supply side: (1) “shallow” structural models, which essentially specify supply curves with no explicit maximization behavior, and (2) “deep” structural models that provide a detailed specification of technology and optimizing behavior by producers, but do not include all factor inputs in production. While the models vary in their specifications of technology, both within and between the PE and CGE families, we consider two stylized theoretical models to compare the behavior of crop yields and supply functions in CGE models with their behavior in shallow structural PE models. We find that the theoretical responsiveness of supply to changes in prices can be similar, depending on parameter choices that define the behavior of implicit supply functions over the domain of applicability defined by the common scenarios used in the AgMIP comparisons. In practice, however, the applied models are more complex and differ in their empirical sensitivity to variations in specification—comparability of results given parameter choices is an empirical question. To illustrate the issues, sensitivity analysis is done with one global CGE model, MAGNET, to indicate how the results vary with different specification of technical change, and how they compare with the results from PE models.

Suggested Citation

  • Robinson, Sherman & van Meijl, Hans & Valin, Hugo & Willenbockel, Dirk & Fujimori, Shinichiro & Masui, Toshihiko & Sands, Ron & Wise, Marshall & Calvin, Katherine & Havlik, Petr & d'Croz, Daniel Mason, 2013. "Comparing PE and CGE Supply-Side Specifications in Models of the Global Food System," Conference papers 332382, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:332382
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/332382/files/6530.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charles I. Jones & Dean Scrimgeour, 2008. "A New Proof of Uzawa's Steady-State Growth Theorem," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 90(1), pages 180-182, February.
    2. Willemien Kets & Arjan Lejour, 2003. "Sectoral TFP developments in the OECD," CPB Memorandum 58, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    3. Havlík, Petr & Schneider, Uwe A. & Schmid, Erwin & Böttcher, Hannes & Fritz, Steffen & Skalský, Rastislav & Aoki, Kentaro & Cara, Stéphane De & Kindermann, Georg & Kraxner, Florian & Leduc, Sylvain & , 2011. "Global land-use implications of first and second generation biofuel targets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 5690-5702, October.
    4. H. Uzawa, 1961. "Neutral Inventions and the Stability of Growth Equilibrium," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 28(2), pages 117-124.
    5. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    6. Nin-Pratt, Alejandro & Johnson, Michael & Magalhaes, Eduardo & You, Liangzhi & Diao, Xinshen & Chamberlin, Jordan, 2011. "Yield gaps and potential agricultural growth in West and Central Africa," Research reports alejandronin-pratt, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    7. Martin Lampe & Dirk Willenbockel & Helal Ahammad & Elodie Blanc & Yongxia Cai & Katherine Calvin & Shinichiro Fujimori & Tomoko Hasegawa & Petr Havlik & Edwina Heyhoe & Page Kyle & Hermann Lotze-Campe, 2014. "Why do global long-term scenarios for agriculture differ? An overview of the AgMIP Global Economic Model Intercomparison," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(1), pages 3-20, 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. Sherman Robinson & Hans Meijl & Dirk Willenbockel & Hugo Valin & Shinichiro Fujimori & Toshihiko Masui & Ron Sands & Marshall Wise & Katherine Calvin & Petr Havlik & Daniel Mason d'Croz & Andrzej Tabe, 2014. "Comparing supply-side specifications in models of global agriculture and the food system," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(1), pages 21-35, January.
    2. Roberto Veneziani & Luca Zamparelli & Daniele Tavani & Luca Zamparelli, 2017. "Endogenous Technical Change In Alternative Theories Of Growth And Distribution," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(5), pages 1272-1303, December.
    3. Irmen, Andreas, 2018. "A Generalized Steady-State Growth Theorem," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(4), pages 779-804, June.
    4. Gregory Casey, 2018. "Technology-Driven Unemployment," 2018 Meeting Papers 302, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    5. Zuzana Smeets Kristkova & Cornelis Gardebroek & Michiel van Dijk & Hans van Meijl, 2017. "The impact of R&D on factor-augmenting technical change – an empirical assessment at the sector level," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(3), pages 385-417, July.
    6. Dorota Ciołek & Tomasz Brodzicki, 2016. "Determinanty produktywności polskich powiatów," Bank i Kredyt, Narodowy Bank Polski, vol. 47(5), pages 463-494.
    7. Dongya Koh & Raül Santaeulàlia-Llopis, 2017. "Countercyclical Elasticity of Substitution," Working Papers 946, Barcelona School of Economics.
    8. Basso, Henrique S. & Jimeno, Juan F., 2021. "From secular stagnation to robocalypse? Implications of demographic and technological changes," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 833-847.
    9. Li, Defu & Bental, Benjamin, 2023. "What determines the Direction of Technological Progress(2023.11.16)?," MPRA Paper 119211, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 16 Nov 2023.
    10. Growiec, Jakub & McAdam, Peter & Mućk, Jakub, 2018. "Endogenous labor share cycles: Theory and evidence," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 74-93.
    11. Lochhead, Kyle & Ghafghazi, Saeed & Havlik, Petr & Forsell, Nicklas & Obersteiner, Michael & Bull, Gary & Mabee, Warren, 2016. "Price trends and volatility scenarios for designing forest sector transformation," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 184-191.
    12. Jess Benhabib & Jesse Perla & Christopher Tonetti, 2021. "Reconciling Models of Diffusion and Innovation: A Theory of the Productivity Distribution and Technology Frontier," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(5), pages 2261-2301, September.
    13. Danny Givon, 2006. "Factor Replacement versus Factor Substitution, Mechanization and Asymptotic Harrod Neutrality," DEGIT Conference Papers c011_028, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade.
    14. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman & Ezra Oberfield & Thomas Sampson, 2017. "Balanced Growth Despite Uzawa," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(4), pages 1293-1312, April.
    15. Moysan, Gwenaël & Senouci, Mehdi, 2016. "A note on 2-input neoclassical production functions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 80-86.
    16. Senay Acikgoz & Merter Mert, 2015. "A Short Note on the Fallacy of Identification of Technological Progress in Models of Economic Growth," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(2), pages 21582440155, April.
    17. Gregory Casey & Ryo Horii, 2019. "A Multi-factor Uzawa Growth Theorem and Endogenous Capital-Augmenting Technological Change," 2019 Meeting Papers 1458, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    18. Christoph Müller & Richard D. Robertson, 2014. "Projecting future crop productivity for global economic modeling," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(1), pages 37-50, January.
    19. Miguel A. Leon-Ledesma & Mathan Satchi, 2010. "A Note on Balanced Growth with a less than unitary Elasticity of Substitution," Studies in Economics 1007, School of Economics, University of Kent.
    20. von Maydell, Richard, 2024. "Artificial Intelligence and its Effect on Competition and Factor Income Shares," VfS Annual Conference 2023 (Regensburg): Growth and the "sociale Frage" 277654, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association, revised 2024.

    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:332382. 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.