The economic impact of the Trans‐Pacific Partnership: What have we learned from CGE simulation?

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. The ARTNeT Working Paper Series disseminates the findings of work in progress to encourage the exchange of ideas about trade issues. An objective of the series is to publish the findings quickly, even if the presentations are less than fully polished. ARTNeT Working Papers are available online at www.artnetontrade.org. All material in the Working Papers may be freely quoted or reprinted, but acknowledgment is requested, together with a copy of the publication containing the quotation or reprint. The use of the working papers for any commercial purpose, including resale, is prohibited. Terms of use: Documents in Disclaimer:The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this Working Paper do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Where the designation "country or area" appears, it covers countries, territories, cities or areas. Bibliographical and other references have, wherever possible, been verified. The United Nations bears no responsibility for the availability or functioning of URLs. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations. The opinions, figures and estimates set forth in this publication are the responsibility of the author(s), and should not necessarily be considered as reflecting the views or carrying the endorsement of the United Nations. Any errors are the responsibility of the author(s). The mention of firm names and commercial products does not imply the endorsement of the United Nations.

The impact of the TPP on selected ASEAN economies

“…Vietnam registers the most significant growth in total output and total import as compared to the other TPP-ASEAN countries whereas in terms of export growth, Vietnam and Malaysia are the largest beneficiaries. These findings are in tune with those of the previous studies by Petri et al (2012), Gilbert et al (2016) and Petri and Plummer (2016).…”

“…Thailand and Philippines have strong trade ties with the TPP-ASEAN nations as well as the other TPP members, so these two economies could be adversely affected to a large extent through the processes of trade diversion and preference erosion (Gilbert et al 2016). The study finds that the global welfare would increase as the TPP agreement comes into effect, though it reduces with the omission of the USA.…”

“…More recently, the World Bank (2016) has also indicated that the TPP will have generally positive effects on participating economies and generally negative effects on non-participating economies. Gilbert et al (2016) have observed that most of the TPP members are likely to benefit from the TPP in aggregate, though the gains are not even. Among all TPP members, largest gains accrue to Vietnam and Malaysia, when the gains are measured in terms of their economic size, whereas largest gains in absolute value are accrue to Japan.…”

“…The projections also showed that export would grow by 20 and 30% by 2030 for Malaysia and Vietnam, respectively. So, these previously published studies have shown that the TPP-ASEAN countries, Malaysia, and Vietnam in particular, would be the most important beneficiaries among all TPP members (Petri et al 2012;World Bank 2016;Petri and Plummer 2016;Gilbert et al 2016). However, all these studies were conducted considering the USA as a significant member of the agreement.…”

Modelling Economic Effects of Reducing Non-Tariff Measures in the Food Processing Sector of Malaysia Using Computable General Equilibrium

“…Both price-and quantity-based approaches can be used as policy shocks in CGE models (Andriamananjara et al, 2004;Chemingui & Dessus, 2008;Ciuriak & Xiao, 2014;Cororaton & Orden, 2015;Fugazza & Maur, 2008;Kee et al, 2009;Petri & Plummer, 2016). Gilbert, Furusawa and Scollay (2018), by estimating the AVEs -the difference between world and domestic prices not explained by tariff measures -follow the most popular means for measuring the border effect of NTMs. With the aid of AVEs, NTMs can be introduced into the CGE models by two means.…”