GTAP-POV: A Framework for Assessing the National Poverty Impacts of Global Economic and Environmental Change

Hertel, Thomas W.; Verma, Monika; Ivanic, Maros; Magalhaes, Eduardo; Ludeña, Carlos E.; Ríos, Ana R.

doi:10.18235/0000178

Cited by 15 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 42 publications

(20 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In order to obtain estimates of factor price changes, a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model is required. In this letter, we combine a modified version of the standard GTAP model, GTAP-AEZ-GHG (Golub et al 2010), with the recently developed poverty module, GTAP-POV (Hertel et al 2011a). GTAP-POV has been used for climate studies before.…”

Section: Materials Methods and Policy Scenariosmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These countries were selected based on data availability and intersections between household surveys and individual countries in the GTAP database. While the selection of countries is not random, it does encompass a wide range of developing countries with greatly differing patterns of poverty (Hertel et al 2011a). Within each country, poverty is broken down into socio-economic strata based on a household's primary source of income (95% or more of income from the following sources): agricultural self-employed (farm income), non-agricultural self-employed (non-agricultural self-employment earnings), urban labor (urban household, wage labor income), rural labor (rural household, wage labor income), Transfer payment dependent, urban diverse, and rural diverse (Hertel et al 2004).…”

Section: Materials Methods and Policy Scenariosmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The poverty consequences of climate change mitigation policy are transmitted through three channels: changes in earnings, changes in taxes, and changes in the real cost of living at the poverty line (Hertel et al 2011a). The following equation from (Hertel et al 2011a) details the relationship between these three components and the poverty headcount in each country r,Ĥ r , where the 'hat' denotes percentage change in the underlying variable:…”

Section: Materials Methods and Policy Scenariosmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Climate change mitigation policies and poverty in developing countries

Hussein¹,

Hertel²,

Golub³

2013

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mitigation of the potential impacts of climate change is one of the leading policy concerns of the 21st century. However, there continues to be heated debate about the nature, the content and, most importantly, the impact of the policy actions needed to limit greenhouse gas emissions. One contributing factor is the lack of systematic evidence on the impact of mitigation policy on the welfare of the poor in developing countries. In this letter we consider two alternative policy scenarios, one in which only the Annex I countries take action, and the second in which the first policy is accompanied by a forest carbon sequestration policy in the non-Annex regions. Using an economic climate policy analysis framework, we assess the poverty impacts of the above policy scenarios on seven socio-economic groups in 14 developing countries. We find that the Annex-I-only policy is poverty friendly, since it enhances the competitiveness of non-Annex countries-particularly in agricultural production. However, once forest carbon sequestration incentives in the non-Annex regions are added to the policy package, the overall effect is to raise poverty in the majority of our sample countries. The reason for this outcome is that the dominant impacts of this policy are to raise returns to land, reduce agricultural output and raise food prices. Since poor households rely primarily on their own labor for income, and generally own little land, and since they also spend a large share of their income on food, they are generally hurt on both the earning and the spending fronts. This result is troubling, since forest carbon sequestration-particularly through avoided deforestation-is a promising, low cost option for climate change mitigation.

show abstract

Section: Materials Methods and Policy Scenariosmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Materials Methods and Policy Scenariosmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Materials Methods and Policy Scenariosmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Climate change mitigation policies and poverty in developing countries

Hussein¹,

Hertel²,

Golub³

2013

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Global Trade Analysis Project poverty framework (GTAP-POV) is an arithmetic micro-simulation that can be sequentially linked to an adjusted version of "standard" GTAP CGE model (Ahmed et al, 2011;Hertel et al, 2009;Hertel et al, 2010;Hertel et al, 2011). The model structure is generic, but must draw on national household survey data (or parameterizations derived from these data) for specific analyses.…”

Section: Examplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methods for including income distribution in global CGE models for long-term climate change research

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Relevant literature on macro-economic modelling is more dispersed and, in general, focuses on single-country analyses. Nevertheless, two strands can be identified: the Microsimulation approach, which elaborates the outcome of the CGE model by using a microsimulation module that downscales the macro-economic result at the individual or group-level (Lofgren et al 2013;Hilderink et al 2009;Hertel et al 2011;Bussolo and Lay 2003); and the Multi-Household approach that directly integrates microdata in the macro-economic model and allows an endogenous poverty evolution (Boccanfuso et al 2003).…”

Section: Inequality and Poverty Determinants In Empirical And Modellimentioning

confidence: 99%

Can the Paris deal boost SDGs achievement? An assessment of climate mitigation co-benefits or side-effects on poverty and inequality

Campagnolo

Davide

2019

World Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper analyses the synergies and trade-offs between emission reduction policies and sustainable development objectives. Specifically, it provides an ex-ante assessment that the impacts of the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), submitted under the Paris Agreement, will have on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of poverty eradication (SDG1) and reduced income inequality (SDG10). By combining an empirical analysis with a modelling exercise, the paper estimates the future trends of poverty prevalence and inequality across countries in a reference scenario and under a climate mitigation policy with alternative revenue recycling schemes. Our results suggest that a full implementation of the emission reduction contributions, stated in the NDCs, is projected to slow down the effort to reduce poverty by 2030 (+2% of the population below the poverty line compared to the baseline scenario), especially in countries that have proposed relatively more stringent mitigation targets and suffer higher policy costs. Conversely, countries with a stringent mitigation policy experience a reduction of inequality compared to baseline scenario levels. If financial support for mitigation action in developing countries is provided through an international climate fund, the prevalence of poverty will be slightly reduced at the aggregate level (185,000 fewer poor people with respect to the mitigation scenario), but the country-specific effect depends on the relative size of funds flowing to beneficiary countries and on their economic structure.

show abstract

GTAP-POV: A Framework for Assessing the National Poverty Impacts of Global Economic and Environmental Change

Cited by 15 publications

References 42 publications

Climate change mitigation policies and poverty in developing countries

Climate change mitigation policies and poverty in developing countries

Methods for including income distribution in global CGE models for long-term climate change research

Can the Paris deal boost SDGs achievement? An assessment of climate mitigation co-benefits or side-effects on poverty and inequality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About