دانلود رایگان مقاله تاثیر سیاست تجاری بر فقر و نابرابری درآمد

Abstract

Unlike previous studies which often focus on trade liberalisation, this paper examines the impact of protectionism in the form of import tariffs and mineral export taxes on rural and urban poverty and income inequality for the first time. Using a dynamic computable general equilibrium model on Indonesia, mineral export taxes were found to adversely affect urban and rural poverty but income inequality hardly changed as the decline in income in the higher income group is not significantly different to the decline in low income groups. However, if smelters for mineral ore are developed, then there is not only a fall in poverty, more so for the rural than urban, but there is some decline in income inequality. On the other hand, although the current imposed import tariffs do not affect poverty or income inequality, any further increases from the current low average MFN applied rates, will see a rise in rural and urban poverty and income inequality. By and large, any small improvements in the trade balance brought upon by the mineral tax and import tariffs are more than outweighed by the substantial decline in real household consumption expenditure due to falls in employment and wages, thereby leading to a fall in GDP growth.

6. Conclusions

This paper is a first in many respects. Contrary to common analyses on trade liberalisation, here we examine the impact of trade protectionism and do so using a dynamic CGE model for the first time. Second, a detailed regional analysis of trade protectionism on both rural and urban poverty and income inequality is presented for the first time. Third, both import tariffs and mineral export taxes are analysed in a comparative framework for the first time. The contributions of these analyses are important as the pressure to undertake protectionism measures by countries is not likely to go away due to the vulnerable macroeconomic context, unemployment risk and widening external trade imbalances that countries encounter. This paper is thus a timely reminder that import tariffs and mineral export taxes are distortionary and although there is some improvement in terms of trade and the trade balance, these are outweighed by the decline in household expenditure and hence a lowering of GDP growth. The mineral export taxes lead to an increase in poverty incidence in both urban and rural areas, more so in the rural than in the urban areas but with the smelter development, there is a decline in poverty. Income inequality with the mineral export taxes is not affected as changes in the incomes of the poor are not significantly different from that of the rich. However, with smelter development, there is some decline in income equality. With the import tariffs, neither poverty nor income inequality are affected but if this is raised from the current average MFN applied rates, then poverty and income inequality could worsen.