Search results

Examines the impact of the sugar tariff‐rate import quota programme on the United States economy. Uses a computable general equilibrium model composed of 14 producing sectors, 14 consuming sectors, six household categories classified by fincome, and a government. Examines the effects of abolishing the tariff‐rate import quota on sugar prices and quantities. Suggests that a complete elimination of the sugar programme would result in lower output by all producing sectors (by about $2.85 billion) but, for all producing sectors besides the agriculture programme crops, crude oil, and petroleum refining sectors, output would actually increase (by about $2.98 billion). There would also be an increase in the consumption of goods and services (by about $197 million), and an increase in welfare (by about $121 million). The government would realize a reduction in revenue of about $15 million. When subjected to a sensitivity analysis, the study′s results are reasonably robust with regard to the assumption of the value of the own‐price elasticity of demand for sugar – i.e., while the model′s equilibrium values do vary in response to different assumptions of the values of this elasticity, the fluctuations are not so enormous as to suggest that the model is unrealistically sensitive to these parameters.

Pantaleoni used to say that there are two categories of economists—those who can, in the sense of being able to produce original work, and those who cannot. A more meaningful and more useful distinction can be made between those who reason about the given problems in terms of stable equilibrium (most of them classicists) and those who do their thinking in terms of unstable equilibrium (actually stable disequilibrium) and sheer disequilibrium (most of them modern and contemporary scientists).

In this article, we survey experiments that are directly related to monetary policy and central banking. We argue that experiments can also be used as a tool for central bankers for bench testing policy measures or rules. We distinguish experiments that analyze the reasons for non-neutrality of monetary policy, experiments in which subjects play the role of central bankers, experiments that analyze the role of central bank communication and its implications, experiments on the optimal implementation of monetary policy, and experiments relevant for monetary policy responses to financial crises. Finally, we mention open issues and raise new avenues for future research.

I study the economic implications of the world oil market dominated by OPEC and non-OPEC major oil producing countries using a general equilibrium model of trilateral trade with oil duopoly. There are three countries and three goods, x, y, and oil (z). Home (H) is endowed with good x . Foreign (F) is endowed with good y and also produces oil (z). Middle (M) is an oil producing country and supplies oil only. I consider two types of oil market structure; (1) Cournot duopoly and (2) perfect competition. I find that Foreign is actually worse off under Cournot duopoly despite being a duopolist for wide range of parameter values that reflect real world situations. This is mainly due to reduced consumption of oil and reduced value of good y endowment under duopoly when Foreign is a net oil exporter or oil autarky, and is also due to worsening terms-of-trade effect under duopoly when Foreign is a net oil importer. Welfare reversal with higher welfare of Foreign under oil duopoly occurs only under highly unrealistic parameter values, and hence the main results of the study remain robust.