Suchergebnisse

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the impact on wheat
production, consumption, and trade of changing the input subsidy and
output price subsidy policies. A model of the wheat market in Pakistan
is developed to examine the likely effects of alternative wheat pricing
policies in Pakistan. A recursive econometric simulation model was used
to project production, consumption, and trade under the baseline and two
other scenarios. The baseline scenario is designed to predict the
evolution of production, consumption, and trade if agricultural policies
are maintained until the year 2000. In scenario one, the effects of
complete subsidy removal are assessed while in scenario two the
subsidies are assumed to be phased out gradually. The results of the
study indicate that there will be a greater decline in wheat production
if the government eliminates the input subsidies at once than if there
is a gradual phasing out of these. The results suggest that there will
be a little impact on the consumption of wheat due to the increase in
consumer price of wheat. However, the lower-income household with the
higher number of family members will be affected more with the increase
in the price of staple wheat. Imports of wheat are greater if the
subsidies are eliminated at once, as compared to phasing them out
gradually.

Currency depreciation as a channel of output management has been a hot and controversial topic in both developed and developing economies. In Pakistan?s case, relevant research would require study of annual data available for the period 1972 to 2010. The stationarity of variables under consideration at different orders require the application of the bounds testing approach to cointegration. The findings based on open economy IS-LM framework induce a negative effect of currency depreciation on output levels. This is consistent with the long-run estimates of the autoregressive distributive lag (ARDL) model. The short-run estimates of error-correction model (ECM) may lead to significant increment in output levels because of the depreciation of Pakistan rupee. Government spending may cause to reduce the output in the short-run, as well as, in long-run which furnishes strong support to crowding out hypothesis. The terms of trade, positive in the short-run, are negatively related to output in the long-run. However, surprise money has been insignificant in both long-run and short-run ECM. The country would need a clear long-term policy regime that inspires trust of the international community and restores the exporters? confidence.

The study deals with trade benefits from the free trade
agreement of the SAARC countries. It assesses the trade potential and
trade creation with member and non-member countries. The gravity model
has been used to measure the bilateral trade flows and to assess the
trade effect for member and non-member countries. Two analyses estimate
the gravity model. The first analysis is based on crosssectional data to
capture the trade effect individually each year; and the second
analysisutilises the pooled data to measure the overall trade effects
and trade flows for the period 2003 to 2008. The results from the two
approaches show that estimated coefficients are consistent with the
model assumptions. Both analyses show that the regional trade agreement
of the SAARC countries could divert the trade for member countries as
well as for the non-member countries. However, trade volume will
increase only if the major partners (Pakistan, India, and Sri Lanka)
sign regional trade agreements. JEL classification: F15 Keywords: Trade;
Regional Integration; Gravity Model

South Asia is the second most violent place on earth after Iraq. Conflicts in Afghanistan and Pakistan have attracted global attention. Parts of India, Sri Lanka, and Nepal have experienced long-running conflict. Conflicts result in death, misery, social trauma, destruction of infrastructure, and have huge spillover effects. What is conflict? Where is it concentrated? Is conflict a problem for development, or a failure of development? And what should policy makers do?

South Asia has attracted global attention because it has experienced rapid GDP growth over the last two decades. What is not so well known is that South Asia is the least integrated region in the world. South Asia has opened its door to the rest of the world but it remains closed to its neighbors. Poor market integration, weak connectivity, and a history of friction and conflict have resulted in two South Asias. The first South Asia is dynamic, growing rapidly, highly urbanized, and is benefiting from global integration. The second South Asia is rural, land locked, full of poverty, and lagging. The divergence between the two South Asias is on the rise. Policy makers in South Asia have realized that countries and regions can not grow in isolation. The unique geography of South Asia-distance and density--has the potential to raise growth through increased flow of labor, capital, ideas, technology, goods and services within the region and with the rest of the world. Most lagging regions, in terms of both per capita income and poverty incidence, in South Asia are either land-locked or located in the border areas. Regional cooperation and market integration will unlock the development of these lagging regions in South Asia.

This volume examines the dichotomy between the two faces of South Asia - one poverty stricken and lagging in development, the other highly urbanized and growing rapidly - and tries to find a workable solution to bridge this gap. It looks at the many policy and institutional constraints that contribute to this dichotomy, especially regional conflict that has made South Asia one of the least integrated regions of the world

"South Asia has attracted global attention because it has experienced rapid GDP growth over the last two decades. What is not so well known is that South Asia is the least integrated region in the world. South Asia has opened its door to the rest of the world but it remains closed to its neighbors. Poor market integration, weak connectivity, and a history of friction and conflict have resulted in two South Asias. The first South Asia is dynamic, growing rapidly, highly urbanized, and is benefiting from global integration. The second South Asia is rural, land locked, full of poverty, and lagging. The divergence between the two South Asias is on the rise. Policy makers in South Asia have realized that countries and regions can not grow in isolation. The unique geography of South Asia-distance and density--has the potential to raise growth through increased flow of labor, capital, ideas, technology, goods and services within the region and with the rest of the world. Most lagging regions, in terms of both per capita income and poverty incidence, in South Asia are either land-locked or located in the border areas. Regional cooperation and market integration will unlock the development of these lagging regions in South Asia. "--World Bank web site

The geography of poverty has changed. More than 70 percent of the world s poor live not in low-income countries, but in middle-income countries. In 2008, nearly 570 million people lived on less than US$1.25 a day in South Asia, compared to 385 million in sub-Saharan Africa. In addition, nearly 70 percent of the poor people in South Asia live in the lagging regions. Improving the living standards of these regions is crucial to achieving the goal of shared prosperity. Economic growth is not sufficient to enable the lagging regions of South Asia to catch up with the leading regions, in terms of proportional reductions in poverty rates. Policies must be specifically targeted toward achieving greater growth and poverty reduction in these regions. One particular policy channel to achieve shared prosperity is pro-poor fiscal transfers. For the most part, interstate fiscal transfers in South Asian countries do promote equity through transfer of resources to poorer regions, but this outcome usually occurs when pro-poor redistribution has explicit rules and transparency. Further, simply directing financial resources to lagging regions may not be sufficient, and may need to be complemented with increases in capacity, transparency, and participation to facilitate accountability at the local level. Policy makers need to boost shared prosperity and take another look at the millennium development goal paradigm. A new lens is needed- one that shifts the focus of policy from national to subnational level, and from leading to lagging regions, where poverty, gender disparity, and human misery are concentrated.