![trade_pessimism_justified.jpg](/sites/default/files/styles/featured_box_portrait_mobile/public/publication/trade_pessimism_justified.jpg?h=ec29f111&itok=OA9tKM6c)
Is trade pessimism justified? Opening the "black box" of trade modeling
June 2006: In the early years of this decade, as the World Trade Organization's Doha Round negotiations began to take shape, simulations of the welfare gains from complete liberalization of merchandise trade were suggesting the world economy would be as much as $800 billion richer with an ambitious and successful Round, and that approximately two-thirds of these gains would be appropriated by developing countries. Over the last two years, however, simulations of the welfare gains from full multilateral trade liberalization have yielded much smaller values than were being touted only a few years ago. Moreover, the gains for developing countries appear now to be vanishingly small.
The rationale for liberalizing trade - reducing or eliminating tariffs and certain subsidies - is built on fundamental assumptions about the world economy, and mathematical representations of how producers and consumers react to changes in relative prices, changes to policy, etc. Trade economists have incorporated these assumptions and relationships into large economic models that are solved with the aid of computers. At the heart of most large, multi-country modeling efforts are so-called computerized general equilibrium (CGE) models. With data on trade and other variables, these CGE models can be used to make predictions about changes in economic variables were trade to become more liberal.
While experts understand the reasons for the downward revisions in these trade models, many trade negotiators remain confused. Adding to their confusion are some important variations in the simulation results carried out by different modelers. Meanwhile, critics point to the many limitations of the models and the estimates they generate, and question the extent to which they should be informing trade policy at all.
This report analyses why trade modeling has produced such diverging results, as well as discussing the conclusions that all models have drawn in common.
You might also be interested in
Border Carbon Adjustments: Trinidad and Tobago country report
This report consolidates, analyzes, and presents views and perspectives of stakeholders from Trinidad and Tobago on border carbon adjustment (BCA) schemes to contribute to the global debate on BCA good practices.
Global Dialogue on Border Carbon Adjustments: The case of Brazil
This report consolidates, analyzes, and presents the views and perspectives of stakeholders from Brazil on border carbon adjustment (BCA) schemes to contribute to the global debate on BCA good practices.
SUNCASA
The Scaling Urban Nature-based Solutions for Climate Adaptation in Sub-Saharan Africa (SUNCASA) project aims to enhance climate resilience, gender equality and social inclusion, and biodiversity protection in urban communities in Dire Dawa (Ethiopia), Kigali (Rwanda), and Johannesburg (South Africa). Focused on community-level capacity building and leveraging gender-responsive nature-based solutions (NbS), SUNCASA will benefit 2.2 million people living in high-flood-risk areas.
Sustainable Asset Valuation of Ecosystem-Based Adaptation Measures in the Reventazón River Basin, Costa Rica
In this integrated cost-benefit analysis, the Nature-Based Infrastructure (NBI) Global Resource Centre demonstrates the potential of ecosystem-based adaptation to stabilize hydrology and ensure a reliable water and energy supply in the Reventazón region of Costa Rica.