No abstract

This paper is a study of Danish aid policy from the early 1960s to 1995. It includes (i) a review of officially stated aims and criteria, (ii) a descriptive analysis of actual behaviour in international comparative perspective, (iii) a review of the theoretical and empirical aid allocation literature, and (iv) a series of panel data regressions to further explore how Danish bilateral aid was, in actual fact, distributed country-by-country. A theoretical model explaining how the allocation process took place is also formulated. It underpins the empirical analysis from which it transpires that a two step model is a useful way of analysing Danish aid allocations. The first step is whether to select a country or not, and the second involves the decision of how much aid to commit. The empirical analysis demonstrates that Danish aid has been guided in both steps by officially stated aims and criteria in an expected and statistically significant manner although a clear Eastern and Southern Africa bias was found. Another general result is that the relative weights of the explanatory variables have varied both from year-toyear and between sub-periods.

No abstract

The economic impact of extending the Common Agricultural Policy to the Central and Eastern European countries (CEEC) has become a major issue in the European enlargement debate. This paper provides an assessment of the economy‐wide effects of European enlargement using a global general equilibrium model where special attention is given to modelling the instruments of the Common Agricultural Policy, the Agenda 2000 proposal and the EU budget. The results indicate a substantial potential for increasing agricultural production in the CEEC. The EU budget will increase significantly and the transfers from EU taxpayers to farmers in the CEEC result in significant welfare gains in the new member countries. In spite of these important transfers the macroeconomic costs for the EU are found to be limited.

It is found that market growth and structural changes will affect the results of quantitative analyses of the Uruguay Round. Rapid economic growth in Asia, and relatively deeper cuts in protection in that region, result in larger proportionate welfare gains in the year 2005 than in the year 1992. It is also found that changing comparative advantage, and shifts in global demand, result in substantial changes in the restrictive effects of the bilateral quotas on textiles and apparel. Accounting for the factors associated with market growth and structural change adds 30% to the estimates of global welfare gains from the Uruguay Round.