IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ift/wpaper/1106.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Welfare Implication of India-ASEAN FTA:An Analysis using GTAP Model

Author

Listed:
  • Biswajit Nag

    (Indian Institute of Foreign Trade, New Delhi, India)

  • Chandrima Sikdar

    (Indian Institute of Foreign Trade, New Delhi, India)

Abstract

The welfare effect under GTAP model computes a money metric equivalent of the utility change. This is calculated by measuring ‘equivalent variation’ (EV) which summarizes the regional welfare changes resulting from any policy shock and is given in dollar values (US $ million). In GTAP, this money metric change is broken into different components, each of which relates to a quantity change interacting with a distortion in the model. Considering the welfare decomposition effect under multiple regions as proposed by Huff & Hurtel (2001), the current study gives an insight into the sources of welfare gain under various simulations describing stages of India-ASEAN FTA. ASEAN is so far the biggest bloc with which India has an operational FTA. Almost 9% of India’s trade is with ASEAN as a group. In thiscontext, the paper makes an attempt to assess the welfare implication of this agreement considering various implementation stages.It has been noticed that relatively bigger ASEAN members will derive more benefits in terms of welfare growth. India will have higher benefits only when the agreement gets fully implemented. ASEAN members will gain from higher ‘terms of trade’ effect while India’s gain mainly will be from the resource reallocation and change in domestic production activities reflected through ‘allocative efficiency’. However, the overall gain gets dampened due to the presence of negative ‘terms of trade’ in India’s welfare equation. India’s import demand of several intermediate as well as final goods will remain high and ASEAN will have advantage to supply these at a higher price yet lower than average prevailing import price in India which will lead to negative ‘terms of trade’ effect for India. The value of ‘allocative efficiency’ for India increases significantly once there is full liberalization. With full liberalization India extends tariff concessions for large number of products which are otherwise included in its negative list and not allowed any concessions. This adds to allocative efficiency- firstly due to removal of protection from several inefficient production processes and second due to increased import taxes contributed by increased imports of many of the products otherwise featuring in the country’s negative list.Once we incorporate imperfect competition and presence of increasing return to scale in selected sectors in India, ‘scale economy’ effect, ‘profit shifting’, and various tax contributions will lead to more welfare gain in India. This indicates that with the presence of imperfect competition, profit shifting will allow India to invest in capital goods and technology leading to high ‘scale effect’ and thereby to increase exports further to ASEAN. The study brings up a very crucial issue that the gain from FTA with ASEAN hinges on India’s big firm’s ability to reduce average cost bringing better technology and quality inputs. This will improve production system in India which in turn will further boost the export sector.

Suggested Citation

  • Biswajit Nag & Chandrima Sikdar, 2011. "Welfare Implication of India-ASEAN FTA:An Analysis using GTAP Model," Working Papers 1106, Indian Institute of Foreign Trade.
  • Handle: RePEc:ift:wpaper:1106
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: ftp://203.190.248.10/RePEc/ift/workingpapers/EC-11-06.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2011
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Huff, Karen & Thomas W. Hertel, 2001. "Decomposing Welfare Changes in GTAP," GTAP Technical Papers 308, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    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. Pierre Boulanger & Hasan Dudu & Emanuele Ferrari & George Philippidis, 2016. "Russian Roulette at the Trade Table: A Specific Factors CGE Analysis of an Agri-food Import Ban," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(2), pages 272-291, June.
    2. Hanslow, Kevin, 2000. "A General Welfare Decomposition For Cge Models," Technical Papers 28724, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    3. Laborde, David & Martin, Will & van der Mensbrugghe, Dominique, 2008. "Implications of the 2008 Doha Draft Agricultural and NAMA Market Access Modalities for Developing Countries," Conference papers 331719, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    4. Aguiar, Angel & Corong, Erwin & van der Mensbrugghe, Dominique, 2020. "The GTAP Recursive Dynamic (GTAP-RD) Model: Version 1.0," Conference papers 333133, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    5. Erwin Corong & Thomas Hertel & Robert McDougall & Marinos Tsigas & Dominique van der Mensbrugghe, 2017. "The Standard GTAP Model, version 7," Journal of Global Economic Analysis, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, vol. 2(1), pages 1-119, June.
    6. Terrie L. Walmsley & Thomas W. Hertel & Elena Ianchovichina, 2006. "Assessing The Impact Of China'S Wto Accession On Investment," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(3), pages 315-339, October.
    7. Uris L. C. Baldos & Thomas W. Hertel & Frances C. Moore, 2019. "Understanding the Spatial Distribution of Welfare Impacts of Global Warming on Agriculture and its Drivers," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 101(5), pages 1455-1472, October.
    8. Elena Ianchovichina & Alessandro Nicita & Isidro Soloaga, 2002. "Trade Reform and Poverty: The Case of Mexico," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(7), pages 945-972, July.
    9. Narayanan, Badri G. & Hertel, Thomas W. & Horridge, J. Mark, 2010. "Disaggregated data and trade policy analysis: The value of linking partial and general equilibrium models," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 755-766, May.
    10. Böhringer, Christoph & Rutherford, Thomas F., 1999. "Decomposing general equilibrium effects of policy intervention in multi-regional trade models: method and sample application," ZEW Discussion Papers 99-36, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    11. Fontagné, Lionel & Guillin, Amélie & Mitaritonna, Cristina, 2010. "Estimations of Tariff Equivalents for the Services Sectors," Conference papers 331941, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    12. Kym Anderson, 2003. "Measuring Effects of Trade Policy Distortions: How Far Have We Come?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 413-440, April.
    13. Antimiani, Alessandro & Conforti, Piero & Salvatici, Luca, 2005. "Alternative Market Access Scenarios in the Agriculture Trade Negotiations of the Doha Round," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 6(2), pages 1-23.
    14. Cristina Cattaneo, 2008. "The Determinants of Actual Migration and the Role of Wages and Unemployment in Albania: an Empirical Analysis," European Journal of Comparative Economics, Cattaneo University (LIUC), vol. 5(1), pages 3-32, June.
    15. Sulamaa, Pekka & Widgrén, Mika, 2005. "Economic Effects of Free Trade between the EU and Russia," Discussion Papers 969, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    16. Böhringer, Christoph & Rutherford, Thomas F., 2000. "Decomposing the cost of Kyoto: a global CGE analysis of multilateral policy impacts," ZEW Discussion Papers 00-11, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    17. Oyewumi, Olubukola Ayodeju & Jooste, Andre & Britz, Wolfgang & van Schalkwyk, Herman D., 2007. "Tariff and Tariff Rate Quota Liberalization in the South African Livestock Industry: Approaches to Welfare Measurement," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 46(1), pages 1-22, March.
    18. Anderson, Kym, 2004. "Setting the Trade Policy Agenda: What Roles for Economists?," Working Papers 14574, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    19. Mr. Jean-Jacques Hallaert, 2007. "Can Regional Integration Accelerate Development in Africa? CGE Model Simulations of the Impact of the SADC FTA on the Republic of Madagascar," IMF Working Papers 2007/066, International Monetary Fund.
    20. Chae‐Deug Yi, 2023. "The economic and trade effects of the UK–Korea free trade agreement on the United Kingdom, Korea, Japan, China, and the European Union," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(2), pages 227-253, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    India-ASEAN FTA; Welfare Measurement; GTAP; CGE;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F12 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Models of Trade with Imperfect Competition and Scale Economies; Fragmentation
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F14 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Empirical Studies of Trade
    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration
    • C68 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computable General Equilibrium Models
    • D58 - Microeconomics - - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium - - - Computable and Other Applied General Equilibrium Models

    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:ift:wpaper:1106. 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: S. Balasubramanian (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iifttin.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.