Skip to Main Navigation

Would trade liberalization help the poor of Brazil (الإنجليزية)

This paper addresses the potential effects of world agricultural trade liberalization on poverty and regional income distribution in Brazil, using an inter-regional applied general equilibrium (AGE) and a micro-simulation model of Brazil tailored for income distribution and poverty analysis by using a detailed representation of households. The model distinguishes 10 different labor types and has 270 different household expenditure patterns. Income can originate from 41 different production activities located in 27 different regions in the country. The AGE model communicates to a micro-simulation model that has around 112,000 Brazilian households and 264,000 adults. Poverty and income distribution indices are computed over the entire sample of households and persons, before and after the policy shocks. The simulated trade liberalization scenario causes agriculture to expand considerably and so, given the importance that agriculture still has for the poorest in Brazil, it has positive impacts on poverty in Brazil. The only states which show an increase in the number of poor households are Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro, where the bulk of the manufacturing activities in Brazil are concentrated. There is an even more positive impact on inequality. The higher fall in the poverty gap is shown to occur mainly on the poorest household groups, suggesting that the poorest among Brazil's poor will benefit more from global trade liberalization.


  • المؤلف

    De Souza Ferreira Filho, Joaquim Bento Horridge, Mark

  • تاريخ الوثيقة


  • نوع الوثيقة

    ورقة عمل (سلسلة مُرقمة)

  • رقم التقرير


  • مجلد رقم


  • عدد المجلدات


  • البلد


  • المنطقة

    أمريكا اللاتينية والبحر الكاريبي,

  • تاريخ الإفصاح


  • حالة الافصاح


  • اسم الوثيقة

    Would trade liberalization help the poor of Brazil?

  • كلمة أساسية

    terms of poverty reduction;national household survey;external terms of trade;international development research centre;constant elasticity of substitution;constant elasticity of transformation;computable general equilibrium model;marginal productivity of capital;unilateral trade policy;household income;income class;average household income;global trade liberalization;Agriculture;Poverty &Inequality;Applied General Equilibrium;consumer price index;allocation of labor;poverty gap;poor household;rates of return;indicators of poverty;agricultural trade liberalization;change in employment;impact on poverty;households with income;government tax collection;low income household;rural household income;income transfer program;household expenditure patterns;trade in goods;national poverty;distribution of wage;trade liberalization period;market for good;share of export;low poverty gap;direct tax rate;employment in agriculture;elimination of trade;domestic production tax;agriculture and livestock;poverty gap index;high poverty gap;decomposable poverty measure;increase in land;import substitution policy;exchange rate devaluation;real exchange rate;trade policy changes;increase in income;low income group;ex ante assessment;categories of labor;reduction in poverty;years of schooling;household expenditure survey;income distribution effects;data on poverty;export demand;base year;income inequality;Poverty Analysis;federal government;agricultural market;regional dimension;minimum wage;external trade;real wage;positive impact;capital stock;high wage;income increase;labor demand;trade shock;trade balance;agricultural product;border price;electronic equipment;Labor Market;export volume;manufacturing activities;real income;regional poverty;agricultural land;regional industry;manufacturing industry;labor ratio;percent change;farm product;capital ratio;demand schedule;chemical product;unemployment rate;household consumption;wage inequality;relative price;primary factors;occupational group;headcount ratio;labor supply;wage changes;import price;national employment;household spending;capital return;household groups;import side;manufactured goods;import volume;skill type;model result;manufacturing sector;rural area;displaced worker;low wage;real gdp;sample bias;balanced growth;living cost;static equilibrium;simulation result;aggregate indicator;white people;policy study;simulation approach;export zone;urban agricultural policy;industrial sector;nutritional need;distribution problem;export tax;family head;household composition;regional breakdown;electronic product;reducing prices;high concentration;factor market;poverty indicator;import tariff;price change;farm input;aggregate investment;unilateral liberalization;external market;agricultural price;regional population;agricultural sector;external demand;middle-income household;production activity;agricultural wage;Wage Bill;adult equivalent;agricultural protection;processed food;policy shock;mineral extraction;output tax;educational level;household demand;agricultural commodity;gas extraction;wage earnings;representative household;consumer behavior;distribution change;consumption bundle;Natural Resources;total worker;metropolitan region;income source;crop mix;national income;household use;macro data;labor input;aggregate result;present study;household data;land rent;fixed input;world trade;subsistence need;statistical agency;industry demand;agricultural industry;agricultural good;foreign price;political change;level of change;foreign demand;agricultural distortions;total employment;foreign good;demand system;supply side;skilled labor;extreme poverty;Labor migration;linear equation;family status;relative wage;merchandise trade;farm price;petroleum product;regional income;national budget;national population;agriculture sector;global liberalization;macroeconomic effect;import share;sugar industry;production subsidy;national share;household poverty;poverty group;wage income;real consumption;initial investment

تنزيل الملفات

تقرير كامل

نسخة رسمية من الوثيقة (قد تضم توقيعات، الخ)