Ahmed, Shahid (2010): India-Korea CEPA: Potentials and Realities.
Download (425kB) | Preview
The present study investigates the potential economic impacts of India- Korea CEPA using trade indices, partial equilibrium and computable general equilibrium. One hypothetical scenario is examined in SMART model and two hypothetical tariff liberalization scenarios are examined in GTAP model focusing on short run and long run. Using the partial equilibrium WITS-SMART model, we tried to assess the impact of liberalization under the CEPA, assuming full liberalization of imports from the India into Korea and vice versa. We more specifically looked at consumer surplus, trade creation and diversion results as well as the impact on tariff revenues. Using GTAP model, it is a good instrument for identifying the winning and losing countries and sectors under policy changes. GTAP can be used to capture effects on output mix, factor usage, trade effects and resultant welfare distribution between countries as a result of changing trade policies at the country, bilateral, regional and multilateral levels. Finally, bilateral investment flows has also been discussed. The GTAP results reveal that Korea gains while India loses in terms of welfare. Sectoral output and employment effects are mixed. Both countries are gaining significantly in their bilateral trade flows. The SSA results reveal that the CGE results are robust. Using partial equilibrium analysis, SMART model indicates positive effect on consumer surplus and on other trade flows. However, tariff revenues will be reduced by this agreement. India is expected to loose US$-768.37 million while Korea will loose by US$ -1232.6 million. The study recommends the following in light of our findings. First, in order to tamper the losses in budget revenues, countries should seek to diversify their tax base and develop alternative less distortionary revenue generating strategy. Secondly, if the consumers are to truly benefit of CEPA, the national capacity to limit rent capture by importers and exporters should be strengthened.
|Item Type:||MPRA Paper|
|Original Title:||India-Korea CEPA: Potentials and Realities|
|English Title:||India-Korea CEPA: Potentials and Realities|
|Keywords:||Trade Intensity Index; CEPA, India, South Korea|
|Subjects:||F - International Economics > F1 - Trade > F15 - Economic Integration
C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C6 - Mathematical Methods ; Programming Models ; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling > C68 - Computable General Equilibrium Models
F - International Economics > F1 - Trade > F17 - Trade Forecasting and Simulation
F - International Economics > F1 - Trade > F12 - Models of Trade with Imperfect Competition and Scale Economies ; Fragmentation
F - International Economics > F2 - International Factor Movements and International Business > F21 - International Investment ; Long-Term Capital Movements
|Depositing User:||Shahid Ahmed|
|Date Deposited:||29. Oct 2010 11:47|
|Last Modified:||01. Jan 2016 13:39|
Ahmed, Shahid. 2010 “India-Japan FTA in Goods: A Partial and General Equilibrium Analysis”Paper presented in Thirteenth Annual Conference on Global Economic Analysis "Trade for Sustainable and Inclusive Growth and Development" during June 9-11,2010 in Malaysia.
Ahmed, Shahid. 2009. “Free Trade among South, East and South-East Asian Countries: A Step towards Asian Integration.” Foreign Trade Review XLIV(2):
Ahmed, Shahid. 2008 “Potential for Trade between Developing and Least Developed Countries: A CGE Analysis” Trade and Development Review Vol. 1, Issue 2, 2008, 122-143, Available online at: http://tdrju.net/index.php/tdr/article/view/17/7
Barro, R., and Sala-I-Martin, X. 1995. Economic Growth. New York: McGraw-Hill
Hertel, T. W. Ed. 1997. “Global Trade Analysis: Modeling and Applications”, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Investment Commission of India, Various Reports, http://www.investmentcommission.in/
Invest Korea, 2009. Overview of FDI in Korea. Ministry of Knowledge Economy, Government of Korea, Republic,
IBEF, Various Reports, http://ibef.org/
Jammes, O. and M. Olarreaga 2005. “Explaining SMART and GSIM”, The World Bank, http://wits.worldbank.org/witsweb/download/docs/Explaining_SMART_and_GSIM.pdf
Kalirajan K. 2007. “Regional Cooperation and Bilateral Trade Flows: An Empirical Measurement of resistance.” The International Trade Journal, 21(2): 85-107.
Kalirajan, K. 1999. “Stochastic Varying Coefficients Gravity Model: An Application in Trade Analysis.” Journal of Applied Statistics, 26: 185–194.
Lawrence, Robert. 1996. Regionalism, Multilateralism, and Deeper Integration. Washington: Brookings Institution.
Narayanan, G. Badri and Terrie L. Walmsley, Eds. 2008. Global Trade, Assistance, and Production: The GTAP 7 Data Base, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue University. Available online at: http://www.gtap.agecon.purdue.edu/databases/v7/v7_doco.asp
Sahoo, Pravakar, Durgesh Kumar Rai and Rajiv Kumar (2009), “India-Korea Trade and Investment Relations, Working Paper No. 242, Indian council for research on international economic relations, New Delhi
Wacziarg, R. 1997. Trade, Competition and market Size. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.