Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T01:15:36.026Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Réformes economiques et croissance pro-pauvre : une application macro-micro aux Philippines

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 August 2016

Dorothée Boccanfuso ,
G. Rodolphe A. Missinhoun  and
Luc Savard
Get access

Résumé

Dans la perspective d'une stratégie de réduction de la pauvreté et l'atteinte des Objectifs du Millénaire pour le Développement, une littérature sur la croissance pro-pauvre s'est développée depuis une quinzaine d'années. Toutefois, les analyses d'impact sur la pauvreté des réformes sont appliquées en équilibre partiel et abordent peu l'efficacité et l'équité conjointement. De plus, elles s'intéressent rarement aux interactions entre les politiques envisagées. Nous abordons ces questions à travers une application d'un modèle d'équilibre général calculable de type macro/micro aux Philippines dans lequel nous générons de la croissance par l'endogénéisation de l'offre de travail et les externalités des dépenses publiques. Les résultats mitigés obtenus des simulations de réformes illustrent l'importance de la prise en compte des spécificités et du contexte particulier de chaque pays dans la mise en œuvre des réformes.

Summary

Summary

An important pro-poor growth literature has emerged in the context of the millennium development goals and poverty reduction strategy papers. Most of this literature relies on partial equilibrium analysis for their applications. Moreover, few researches attempted to analyse policy coherence in this context. In this paper we deal with these issues in a macro/micro computable general equilibrium model. We applied our model to the Philippines and allow for growth through endogenous labour supply and externalities of public expenditures. Our results of standard fiscal reform proposed in developing countries illustrate the importance of including general equilibrium effect in the analysis and to take into account country specificities when formulating policy recommendations.

Keywords

modèle d'équilibre général calculablemicrosimulationpauvretécroissance pro-pauvreD58I30E62CGE modelmicrosimulationpoverty analysispro-poor growthD58I30E62
Type
Research Article
Information
Recherches Économiques de Louvain/ Louvain Economic Review , Volume 76 , Issue 3 , 2010 , pp. 257 - 288
Copyright
Copyright © Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de recherches économiques et sociales 2010 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

GREDI, Département d'économique, Faculté d'administration, Université de Sherbrooke, Québec Canada, [email protected].

**

GREDI et Institut d'Etudes Politiques de Paris, [email protected].

***

GREDI, Département d'économique, Faculté d'administration, Université de Sherbrooke, Québec Canada, luc.savard @ usherbrooke.ca.

References

BIBLIOGRAPHIE

Aaberge, R., Colombino, U., Homøy, E., Strøm, B. et Wennemo, T. (2004). “Population Aging and Fiscal Sustainability: An Integrated Micromacro analysis of required tax changes”, Discussion Paper no. 366, Statistics Norway.Google Scholar
Adam, C. et Bevan, D. (2006). “Aid and the Supply Side: Public Investment, Export Performance and Dutch Disease in Low Income Countries,” World Bank Economic Review, Vol. 20, n° 2, pp. 261–290.Google Scholar
Agénor, P.R. Izquierdo, A. et Fofack, H. (2003). “IMMPA: A Quantitative Macroeconomic Framework for the Analysis of Poverty Reduction Strategies”. Mimeo World Bank, Washington.Google Scholar
Anderson, K. et Martin, W. (2005). “Agricultural Trade Reform and the Doha Development Agenda”, The World Economy, Vol. 28, n° 9, pp. 1301–1327.Google Scholar
Banque, mondiale (1990). “Analysis Plans for Understanding the Social Dimensions of Adjustment”, Washington, SDA unit, report n° 8691-AFR, Banque mondiale.Google Scholar
Besley, T. et Cord, L.J. (2007). “Delivering on the promise of pro-poor growth, insights and lessons from country experiences, Palgrave Macmillan and the World Bank.Google Scholar
Bhagwati, J.N. (1988). “Poverty and Public Policy”, World Development, Vol. 16 n° 5, pp. 539–654.Google Scholar
Boccanfuso, D., Decaluwé, B. et Savard, L. (2008). “Poverty, Income Distribution and CGE modelling: Does the Functional Form of Distribution Matter?” Journal of Economic Inequality. Vol. 6, n° 2, pp.149–184.Google Scholar
Boccanfuso, D., et Savard, L. (2007). “Poverty and Inequality Impact Analysis of Cotton Subsidies: A Microaccounting approach in Mali”, Journal of African Economies, Vol. 16, n° 4, pp. 629–659.Google Scholar
Boccanfuso, D. et Ménard, C. (2009). “La croissance pro-pauvre : un aperçu exhaustif de la boîte à outils”, Cahier de recherche du GREDI n° 09-06, Université de Sherbrooke.Google Scholar
Bourguignon, F. (2004). “The Poverty-Growth-Inequality Triangle”, article présenté à Indian Council for Research on International Economie Relations, New Delhi, 4 Février, 2004, Banque mondiale.Google Scholar
Bourguignon, F., Robilliard, A.S. et Robinson, S. (2005). “Representative versus real households in the macroeconomic modelling of inequality”, dans Kehoe, T.J. Srinivasan, T.N. et Whalley, J. (eds) “Frontiers in applied general equilibrium modelling”, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press Google Scholar
Bourguignon, F. et Spadaro, A. (2006). “Microsimulation as a Tool for Evaluating Redistribution Policies.” Journal of Economie Inequality, Vol. 4, n° 1, pp. 77–106.Google Scholar
Bourguignon, F. et Savard, L. (2008). “A CGE Integrated Multi-Household Model with Segmented Labor Markets and Unemployment.” dans Bourguignon, F. Pereira da Silva, L.A. et Bussolo, M. (Eds) The Impact of Macroeconomic Policies on Poverty and Income Distribution: Macro-Micro Evaluation Techniques and Tools, Houndmills, England: Pal-grave-Macmillan Publishers Limited.Google Scholar
Chen, S. et Ravallion, M. (2004). “Welfare Impacts of China’s Accession to the World Trade Organization.” The World Bank Economic Review Vol. 18, n° 1, pp. 29–57.Google Scholar
Cloutier, M.-H., Cockburn, J. Decaluwé, B. Khondker, B.H. et Raihan, S. (2008). “Welfare, Poverty and Income Distribution Effects of Trade Liberalization: A Review of the CGE Literature”, dans Cockburn, J. Decaluwé, B. et Robichaud, V. (Eds), Trade Liberalization and Poverty: A CGE Analysis of the 1990’s Experience in Africa and Asia, PEP.Google Scholar
Cogneau, D. et Robilliard, A.-S. (2000). “Income Distribution, Poverty and Growth in Madagascar: Micro Simulations in a General Equilibrium Framework.” IFPRI TMD Discussion Paper n°61, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Cororaton, C. et Cockburn, J. (2007). “Trade Reform and Poverty-Lessons from the Philippines: a CGE Microsimulation Analysis”, Journal of Policy Modeling, Vol.20, n° 1, pp. 141–163.Google Scholar
Decaluwé, B. Dumont, J.-C. et Savard, L. (1999). “How to Measure Poverty and Inequality in General Equilibrium Framework.” Cahier de recherche n° 9920, CREFA, Université Laval, Québec.Google Scholar
Decaluwé, B., Martens, A. et Savard, L. (2001). “La politique Économiques du Développement”, Université Francophone-Presse de l'Université de Montréal, Montréal, pp. 1–509.Google Scholar
Dollar, D et Kraay, A. (2002). “Growth Is Good for the Poor,” Journal of Economic Growth, Vol. 7, n° 3, pp. 195 225.Google Scholar
Estache, A., Perrault, J.-F. et Savard, L. (2008). “Impact of Infrastructure Spending in Sub-Saharan Africa : CGE Modeling Approach”, Cahier de recherche, 08-03, GREDI, Université de Sherbrooke.Google Scholar
Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) (1997). National Statistics Office, Manilla, Philippines.Google Scholar
Fortin, B. Marceau, N. et Savard, L. (1997). “Taxation, wage controls and the informal sector.” Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 66, n° 2, pp. 293–312.Google Scholar
Foster, J.E., Greer, J. et Thorbecke, E. (1984). “A Class of Decomposable Poverty Measures”. Econometrica, Vol. 52, n° 3, pp. 761–776.Google Scholar
Fougère, M. et Merette, M. (1999). “Population Ageing and Economic Growth in Seven OECD Countries”, Economic Modelling, Vol. 16, n° 3, pp. 411–427.Google Scholar
Hertel, T., et Reimer, J. (2005). “Predicting the Poverty Impacts of Trade Reform”, Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Vol. 14, n° 4, pp. 377–405.Google Scholar
Horridge, J.M. et de Souza Ferreira Filho, J.B. (2006). ‘Economic Integration, Poverty and Regional Inequality in Brazil’, Revista Brasileira de Economia, Vol. 60, n° 4, pp. 363–387.Google Scholar
Jung, H.S. et Thorbecke, E. (2003). “The Impact of Public Education Expenditure on Human Capital, Growth and Poverty in Tanzania and Zambia: A General Equilibrium Approach”. Journal of Policy Modelling, Vol. 25, n° 8, pp. 701–725.Google Scholar
Kakwani, N., (2000). “On measuring Growth and Inequality Components of Poverty with Application to Thailand.” Journal of Quantitative Economics. Vol. 16, n° 1, pp. 67–68.Google Scholar
Kakwani, N. et Pernia, E. (2001). “What is Pro-Poor Growth?” Asian Development Review Vol. 18, n° 1, pp. 1–16.Google Scholar
Kakwani, N. et Son, H.H. (2008). “Poverty Equivalent Growth Rate,” Review of Income and Wealth, Vol. 54, Issue 4, pp. 643–655.Google Scholar
Klasen, S. (2003). “In Search of The Holy Grail: How to Achieve Pro-Poor Growth?”, Conference Papers for “The ABCDE-Europe Conference towards Pro-Poor Policies”, Banque mondiale.Google Scholar
Lopez, H. (2004). “Pro-Poor Growth: A Review of What We Know (and of What We Don’t)”, World Bank.Google Scholar
Macedo, J.B. et Martins, O.J. (2006). “Growth, Reform indicators and Policy Complementarities”, The Economics of Transition, Vol. 16, n° 2, pp. 141–164.Google Scholar
Magnac, T. (1991). “Segmented of competitive labour markets”, Econometrica, Vol. 59, n° 1, pp. 165–187.Google Scholar
Mayrand, K, Dionne, S., Paquin, M. et Pageot-Lebel, P. (2003). “The economic and Environmental Impacts of Agricultural Subsidies : An Assessment of the 2002 US Farm Bill & Doha Round”. Unisfera International Center, Montreal, Canada. Google Scholar
McCulloch, N., Winters, A. t X. Cirera (2002). “Trade Liberalization and Poverty: A Handbook”, London: Centre for Economic Policy Research and Department for International Development.Google Scholar
Muller, T. (2004). “Evaluating the Economic Effects of Income Security Reforms in Switzerland: an Integrated Microsimulation-Computable General Equilibrium Approach”, mimeo, Université de Genève.Google Scholar
OCDE (2001). “Market Effetcts of Crop Support Measures”, Paris Google Scholar
Reyes, CM (2004). “An Initial Verdict on Our Fight Against Poverty”, Philippine Institute for Development Studies, Discussion paper Series n° 2004-48.Google Scholar
Savard, L. et Adjovi, E. (1998). «Externalités de la santé et de l’éducation et bien-être : Un MEGC appliqué au Bénin». L’Actualité économique, Vol. 74, n° 3, pp. 523–560.Google Scholar
Savard, L. (2003). “Poverty and Income Distribution in a CGE-Household Micro-Simulation Model: Top-Down/Bottom Up Approach”, Cahiers du CIRPEE, n° 03–43.Google Scholar
Savard, L. (2005). “Poverty and Inequality Analysis within a CGE Framework: A Comparative Analysis of the Representative Agent and Microsimulation Approaches”. Development Policy Review Vol. 23, n° 3, pp. 313–332.Google Scholar
Savard, L. (2006). “Analyse de la pauvreté et distribution de revenus dans le cadre de la modélisation en équilibre général calculable”, Thèse de Doctorat, Ecoles des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris.Google Scholar