IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/332440.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Household Welfare Impact of Trade Liberalization in Nigeria: A Computable General Equilibrium Model

Author

Listed:
  • Okodua, Henry

Abstract

Trade liberalization policy across countries of the world gathered momentum in the 1990s and has not abated ever since. The major impetus for these policy reforms has been the strong desire of countries to harness the benefits embedded in international trade (this is as suggested by the recent experiences of economic growth in many economies particularly, the emerging market economies), and hopefully increase the standard of living of citizens. While the empirical link between trade liberalization and its economic growth outcomes in Nigeria has received considerable attention in the literature, the household welfare impact or income distributional effect of this policy remains under-researched. This study examines the various household welfare scenarios that will result from the imposition of shocks on import tariffs in the Nigerian economy. To achieve this, the paper utilizes the computable general equilibrium model based on a 2006 social accounting matrix for Nigeria to conduct a macro-micro simulations of the economy. The computable general equilibrium model is implemented in a static module making it a good instrument for controlled policy simulations and experiments. The paper further tracks the patterns of possible welfare losses or gains for the rural and urban households under the various simulations. Some of the major findings suggest that a liberalization policy will particularly hurt the agricultural sector as the policy will induce a shift in consumption preferences within this sector from domestic production to imports. Overall, a complete or partial removal of import tariffs will also hurt the rural households more than the urban households in Nigeria.

Suggested Citation

  • Okodua, Henry, 2014. "Household Welfare Impact of Trade Liberalization in Nigeria: A Computable General Equilibrium Model," Conference papers 332440, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:332440
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/332440/files/7107.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Margaret Chitiga & Ramos Mabugu, 2006. "Does Trade Liberalisation Lead to Poverty Alleviation? a CGE Microsimulation Approach for Zimbabwe," Working Papers MPIA 2006-18, PEP-MPIA.
    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. (Stanley) Cho, Sang-Wook & P. Díaz, Julián, 2008. "Trade Liberalization in Latin America and Eastern Europe: the Cases of Ecuador and Slovenia," Journal of Economic Integration, Center for Economic Integration, Sejong University, vol. 23, pages 1002-1045.
    4. Winters, L Alan, 2000. "Trade, Trade Policy and Poverty: What Are The Links?," CEPR Discussion Papers 2382, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. David Dollar & Aart Kraay, 2004. "Trade, Growth, and Poverty," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(493), pages 22-49, February.
    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. Zhicheng Liang, 2006. "Threshold Estimation on the Globalization-Poverty Nexus: Evidence from China," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2006-57, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    2. Emma Aisbett, 2007. "Why are the Critics So Convinced that Globalization is Bad for the Poor?," NBER Chapters, in: Globalization and Poverty, pages 33-86, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Thomas W. Hertel & Jeffrey J. Reimer, 2006. "Predicting the Poverty Impacts of Trade Reform," QA - Rivista dell'Associazione Rossi-Doria, Associazione Rossi Doria, issue 2, May.
    4. Alemayehu Geda, 2006. "Openness, Inequality and Poverty in Africa," Working Papers 25, United Nations, Department of Economics and Social Affairs.
    5. Guntur Sugiyarto*, 2005. "A Review of: “Ramkishen S. Rajan, Economic Globalization and Asia: Essays on Finance, Trade and Taxation," Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(3), pages 397-402.
    6. Miet Maertens & Liesbeth Colen & Johan F. M. Swinnen, 2011. "Globalisation and poverty in Senegal: a worst case scenario?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 38(1), pages 31-54, March.
    7. Kym Anderson, 2003. "Trade Liberalization, Agriculture, and Poverty in Low-income Countries," WIDER Working Paper Series DP2003-25, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    8. Chitiga, Margaret & Kandiero, Tonia & Mabugu, Ramos, 2005. "A Computable General Equilibrium Micro-Simulation Analysis of the Impact of Trade Policies on Poverty in Zimbabwe," Conference papers 331388, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    9. Montalbano, Pierluigi, 2011. "Trade Openness and Developing Countries' Vulnerability: Concepts, Misconceptions, and Directions for Research," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 1489-1502, September.
    10. 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.
    11. Hertel, Thomas W. & Winters, L. Alan, 2005. "Poverty impacts of a WTO agreement : synthesis and overview," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3757, The World Bank.
    12. Asma Boussetta, 2022. "Microfinance, Poverty and Education," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 64(1), pages 86-108, March.
    13. Sèna Kimm Gnangnon, 2023. "Do unilateral trade preferences help reduce poverty in beneficiary countries?," International Journal of Economic Policy Studies, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 249-288, February.
    14. Francois, Joseph & Rojas-Romagosa, Hugo, 2011. "Household inequality, social welfare, and trade," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 422-431, November.
    15. Asteriou, Dimitrios & Dimelis, Sophia & Moudatsou, Argiro, 2014. "Globalization and income inequality: A panel data econometric approach for the EU27 countries," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 592-599.
    16. Chun-Hung A. Lin & Ho-Shan Lin & Ching-Po Hsu, 2017. "Digital Divide and Income Inequality: A Spatial Analysis," Review of Economics & Finance, Better Advances Press, Canada, vol. 8, pages 31-43, May.
    17. Dithmer, Jan & Abdulai, Awudu, 2017. "Does trade openness contribute to food security? A dynamic panel analysis," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 218-230.
    18. Naranpanawa, Athula & Bandara, Jayatilleke S. & Selvanathan, Saroja, 2011. "Trade and poverty nexus: A case study of Sri Lanka," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 328-346, March.
    19. Tsai, Pan-Long & Huang, Chao-Hsi, 2007. "Openness, Growth and Poverty: The Case of Taiwan," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 1858-1871, November.
    20. Khan, Muhammad Aamir, 2017. "Regional Trade and Economic Development: Options for Pakistan," Conference papers 332899, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.

    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:332440. 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.