IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/333199.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Economic Impacts to Be Brought by the DPRK’s Return to International Society: CGE Analysis with the GTAP 9A Data Base

Author

Listed:
  • Shagdar, Enkhbayar
  • Nakajima, Tomoyoshi

Abstract

Employing the Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) Data Base and the standard GTAP Model (the Model), this paper analyzed the expected economic impacts to be brought by the DPRK’s return to international society. However, as the DPRK is not a separate GTAP region, but is represented in the database as part of a composite region of the Rest of East Asia (XEA) along with Macao, the DPRK’s data was generated using the SplitReg program, and the resulting data was used as the base data in the Model. Three economic revitalization and integration scenarios: (i) total factor productivity (TFP) growth in the DPRK; (ii) Korean Unification; and (iii) Northeast Asia free trade agreement (FTA), were considered in the analyses. The simulation results of assuming that the DPRK’s total factor productivity would grow by 30% (60% of labor productivity growth of the ROK between 1963 and 1973) as a result of the country’s return to international markets indicated that the DPRK would have a welfare gain of $6.6 billion associated mostly with the gains in technical change along with allocative efficiency improvements and terms-of-trade gains in investment and savings. The government services sector would be the largest beneficiary of these gains, followed by agriculture, extraction, heavy and light manufacturing sectors. The other two scenarios also resulted in welfare gains for the DRPK, but on smaller scales. As a result of the Korean Unification scenario, the DPRK would have a welfare gain of $1.7 billion, while it would be equal to $107 billion in the case of a free trade agreement in Northeast Asia. Contrary to the first scenario, most of these welfare gains were associated with the country’s gains in terms of trade in goods and services. In terms of impacts on industry, all sectors will benefit from the TFP growth, while there will be winners and losers in the Korean Unification and Northeast Asia FTA scenarios.

Suggested Citation

  • Shagdar, Enkhbayar & Nakajima, Tomoyoshi, 2020. "Economic Impacts to Be Brought by the DPRK’s Return to International Society: CGE Analysis with the GTAP 9A Data Base," Conference papers 333199, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:333199
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/333199/files/10036.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Angel Aguiar & Badri Narayanan & Robert McDougall, 2016. "An Overview of the GTAP 9 Data Base," Journal of Global Economic Analysis, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, vol. 1(1), pages 181-208, June.
    2. Adams, Philip D., 2003. "Interpretation of Macroeconomic Results from a CGE Model such as GTAP," Conference papers 331087, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    3. Warwick J. McKibbin & Jong Wha Lee & Weifeng Liu & Cheol Jong Song, 2018. "Modeling the Economic Impacts of Korean Unification," Asian Economic Journal, East Asian Economic Association, vol. 32(3), pages 227-256, September.
    4. Sh. Enkhbayar & Tomoyoshi Nakajima, 2013. "Impacts of Mongolian FTAs with the Countries in Northeast Asia: CGE Analysis with the GTAP 8 Data Base," The Northeast Asian Economic Review, ERINA - Economic Research Institute for Northeast Asia, vol. 1(2), pages 43-67, December.
    5. Scott C. Bradford & Dong-jin Kim & Kerk L. Phillips, 2011. "Potential economic reforms in North Korea: a dynamic general equilibrium model," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 321-332, December.
    6. Scott Bradford & Dong-jin Kim & Kerk Phillips, 2011. "Potential economic reforms in North Korea: a dynamic general equilibrium model," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 321-332.
    7. Hertel, Thomas, 1997. "Global Trade Analysis: Modeling and applications," GTAP Books, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, number 7685, December.
    8. McKibbin, Warwick J. & Wilcoxen, Peter J., 2013. "A Global Approach to Energy and the Environment," Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, in: Peter B. Dixon & Dale Jorgenson (ed.), Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 995-1068, Elsevier.
    9. Enkhbayar Shagdar & Otgonsaikhan Nyamdaa, 2017. "Impacts of Import Tariff Reforms on Mongolia's Economy: CGE Analysis with the GTAP 8.1 Data Base," The Northeast Asian Economic Review, ERINA - Economic Research Institute for Northeast Asia, vol. 5(1), pages 1-25, March.
    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. Enkhbayar Shagdar & Tomoyoshi Nakajima, 2018. "Economic Effects of Free Trade Agreements in Northeast Asia: CGE Analysis with the GTAP 9.0a Data Base," The Northeast Asian Economic Review, ERINA - Economic Research Institute for Northeast Asia, vol. 6(1), pages 37-53, July.
    2. Enkhbayar Shagdar & Nakajima Tomoyoshi, 2018. "Economic Effects of Free Trade Agreements in Northeast Asia: CGE Analysis with the GTAP 9.0a Data Base," The Northeast Asian Economic Review, ERINA - Economic Research Institute for Northeast Asia, vol. 6(1), pages 37-53, July.
    3. Inkyo Cheong & Valijon Turakulov, 2022. "How Central Asia to Escape from trade isolation?: Policy targeted scenarios by CGE modelling," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(8), pages 2622-2648, August.
    4. Balie, Jean & Strutt, Anna & Nelgen, Signe & Narayanan, 2018. "Infrastructure investments for improved market access in subSaharan Africa: A CGE analysis," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 13(2), June.
    5. Itakura, Ken, 2019. "Incorporating Global Value Chains into the Dynamic GTAP Model [tentative results]," Conference papers 333111, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    6. Khan, Aamir & Walmsley, Terrie & Mukhopadhyay, Kakali, 2019. "Trade Liberalization and Income Inequality: The Case for Pakistan," Conference papers 333125, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    7. Lee, Hiro & Itakura, Ken, 2018. "The welfare and sectoral adjustment effects of mega-regional trade agreements on ASEAN countries," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 20-32.
    8. Nelson Villoria & Rachael Garrett & Florian Gollnow & Kimberly Carlson, 2022. "Leakage does not fully offset soy supply-chain efforts to reduce deforestation in Brazil," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-10, December.
    9. Enkhbayar Shagdar & Tomoyoshi Nakajima, 2018. "Economic Effects of the USA - China Trade War: CGE Analysis with the GTAP 9.0a Data Base," Discussion papers 1806e, ERINA - Economic Research Institute for Northeast Asia.
    10. Mun Ho & Wolfgang Britz & Ruth Delzeit & Florian Leblanc & Roberto Roson & Franziska Schuenemann & Matthias Weitzel, 2020. "Modelling Consumption and Constructing Long-Term Baselines in Final Demand," Journal of Global Economic Analysis, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, vol. 5(1), pages 63-108, June.
    11. Rumiana Górska, 2022. "Sectoral effects of the Japan-EU Economic Partnership Agreement for the European Union countries," Asia Europe Journal, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 99-114, June.
    12. Ken Itakura, 2020. "Evaluating the Impact of the US–China Trade War," Asian Economic Policy Review, Japan Center for Economic Research, vol. 15(1), pages 77-93, January.
    13. Khan, M.A. & Tahir, A., 2018. "Economic Effects of Climate Change on Agriculture Productivity by 2035: A case study of Pakistan," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 275969, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Bruno Lanz & Thomas F. Rutherford, 2016. "GTAPINGAMS, version 9: Multiregional and small open economy models with alternative demand systems," IRENE Working Papers 16-08, IRENE Institute of Economic Research.
    15. Oyamada,Kazuhiko, 2023. "Behavioral characteristics of mrio-based global age models with variable elasticity of substitution between varieties," IDE Discussion Papers 881, Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization(JETRO).
    16. Taran Faehn & Gabriel Bachner & Robert Beach & Jean Chateau & Shinichiro Fujimori & Madanmohan Ghosh & Meriem Hamdi-Cherif & Elisa Lanzi & Sergey Paltsev & Toon Vandyck & Bruno Cunha & Rafael Garaffa , 2020. "Capturing Key Energy and Emission Trends in CGE models: Assessment of Status and Remaining Challenges," Journal of Global Economic Analysis, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, vol. 5(1), pages 196-272, June.
    17. J.A. Giesecke & R. Waschik & N.H. Tran, 2019. "Modelling the Consequences of the U.S.-China Trade War and Related Trade Frictions for the U.S., Chinese, Australian and Global Economies," Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre Working Papers g-294, Victoria University, Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre.
    18. Gabriela Ortiz Valverde & Maria C. Latorre, 2020. "A computable general equilibrium analysis of Brexit: Barriers to trade and immigration restrictions," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 705-728, March.
    19. 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.
    20. Rodríguez, M. & Teotónio, C. & Roebeling, P. & Fortes, P., 2023. "Targeting energy savings? Better on primary than final energy and less on intensity metrics," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    International Relations/Trade; Research Methods/ Statistical Methods;

    JEL classification:

    • D58 - Microeconomics - - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium - - - Computable and Other Applied General Equilibrium Models
    • O53 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Asia including Middle East
    • D24 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Production; Cost; Capital; Capital, Total Factor, and Multifactor Productivity; Capacity

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:333199. 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.