1. 1 Bilateral Free Trade Agreement Between SADC and EU by Nermeen Elmeligy, Daniel McDonald, Mythili G, Hina Nazli, Vijay Ojha, Luciano Sampaio, Shaymal Shrestha, Janeka Wijayasiri

2. 2 Overview SADC’s share in world GDP is only 1 percent, whereas EU’s share in world GDP is 28 percent. In SADC, Botswana is heavily dependent on mining; South Africa’s primary dependence is on manufacturing; Rest of SADC depends on primary commodities. In SADC, South Africa has EU as its largest trade partner; Botswana also has about 13% of its imports originating in EU. South Africa’s exports and imports are dominated by manufacturing commodities. Botswana’s imports are also primarily manufacturing commodities, but exports are dominated by mining commodities.

3. 3 Free trade agreement between SADC (i.e., SA, Botswana and Rest of SADC (RSADC)) and EU has potential for economic gains for the SADC region. To do this, we have shocked the GTAP model for a complete removal of import tariffs and export taxes in SADC and EU. In the standard GTAP closure we made the following changes: –The ratio of trade balance to income of all developing regions was fixed, with savings as a proportion of income being treated as variable –In order to capture the unemployment of unskilled labor, real wage rate for this labor was fixed exogenously, and its supply was endogenized. –World price and quantity of Botswana’s exports of diamond were fixed. Likewise, quantity and price of Botswana’s meat exports to EU were fixed.

4. 4 Welfare Decomposition by Region

5. 5 Results After the removal of trade barriers, GDPs of Botswana, South Africa and EU changed marginally. However, in RSADC it has increased impressively by 5.2%. A large increase in value added of textiles in Botswana, sugar and meat in South Africa, and sugar, meat and milk in RSADC took place. For example: –in Botswana, value added in textile has increased by 90% –In South Africa, value added in sugar has increased by 55% –In RSADC, value added in sugar has increased by 324% This increase is driven by the increased demand for unskilled labor. For example: –in Botswana, unskilled labor in textile has increased by 93% –In South Africa, unskilled labor in sugar has increased by 57% –In RSADC, unskilled labor in sugar has increased by 346% In EU, in most of the sectors, this demand has declined and increased marginally in few sectors, such as wood, metal, other manufacturing.

6. 6 There are massive increases in exports of grain, meat, milk, sugar, other food and textiles from SADC region to EU. The increases are in the range of 48% to 1772% In the imports of SADC the largest increase are in beverages. The increases are in the range of 11% to 371%

7. 7 1 st Extension Sub-Groups Commodities

8. 8  Sub-Groups Commodities  Two Major Sub-Groups: - Agfd: Agricultural and food products. (grain, veg, oagric, lstoc, meat, milk, ofood, sug, bev) - Agfdn: nonagricultural and food products. (mine, text, wood, pchem, metal, mprod, vtran, oman, util, cons, trad)  Experiment: (partial liberalization) 50% tariff reduction on agfd. On both SADC and EU products 100% tariff reduction on agfdn On both SADC and EU products

9. 9 Sub-Groups Commodities (Cont’d) RESULTS Eq. Var.Base Exper.S.G Exper BWA70.8972.8 XSC2766.721611.2 SAD1868.81180.3 XAF-60.59-59.9 EUR1082.751347.8 NAF-193.9-179.2 MER-160.98-134.6 XEU-73.37-118.4 XAM-83.22-38.7 XWA-1063.56-1054

10. 10 Sub-Groups Commodities (Cont’d) Interpretation The two major factors leading to these losses are: -Allocative Effeciency. -Endowment Effect.  Endowment Effect: (for XSC) -It represents nearly 83% of the welfare decomposition. -The major player is the unskilled labor factor (closure: employment is varying) -By imposing 50% tariff reduction on agfd products( which require unskilled labor), South Africa losses primarily through the reduction in employment of the unskilled labor.

11. 11 Goal and observations: To analyze welfare gains due to bilateral agricultural liberalization between EU and SADC by 50% Observations: Different outcomes for SADC members due to liberalization within the group and with the EU South Africa (XSA) receives higher welfare gains when tariffs are liberalized in EU

12. 12 EV (US$ million) CountryEVAgr(By EU) Agr (BySADC) Non-agr (By EU) Non-agr (by SADC) BWA7373-5-31 XSA1611206436431-463 SAD11792906737967

13. 13 Analyzing results South Africa’s case (XSA): a large economy in the SADC group XSA gains due to liberalization on both agriculture and non-agriculture Endowment effects and allocative efficiency after liberalization There is an allocative efficiency of 351/922 for XSA There is an endowment efficiency of 1345/1673 for XSA assuming employment of unskilled labor XSA has a total welfare gain of 1611/2636=61%

14. 14 2 nd Extension Elimination of Agricultural Subsidies in EU

15. 15 Elimination of Agricultural Subsidies in EU Selected 4 agricultural commodities (grain, veg., other agri., livestock) Primary input subsidies are very high for grain, other agri., and livestock. Primary input subsidies mainly go to land and capital in the EU. Base Run : The major contributing trade policy instrument is elimination of import tariff by SADAC holding other things constant. Both EU and SADC gained

16. 16 Simulations Considered different levels of domestic farm subsidy reductions: Pattern of results same for all simulations Selected 50% as the experiment for the analysis

17. 17 Results Comparison of simulation experiment with the base run Domestic farm liberalisation in EU has not made much impact for SADAC Exploring Composition of exports shifting from agriculture to manufacturing in the base run in SA After domestic farm lib. in EU, composition of exports move back to agriculture from manufacturing in SA. The advantage of domestic farm subsidy in EU is not going to SADAC but going to other countries.

18. 18 Base Run Total EV CountriesBase RunSubtotal 3Subtotal 4Subtotal 6 bwa70.890.49.3199.3 xsc2766.732.11171.991130.26 sad1868.8-46.11340.26432.58 xaf-60.590.7-16.22-10.18 eur1082.763.6-807.11-170.87 naf-193.9-0.8-34.69-15.23 mer-160.980.6-15.06-21.17 xeu-73.37-0.156.326.56 xam-83.220.1-59.946.29 xwo-1063.566.5-261.97-237.08

19. 19 Welfare decomposition welfare decomposition WELFARE 1 alloc_A1 2 endw_B1 5 tot_E1 6 IS_F1 1 bwa16.84923.223.8 2 xsc664.12013.2-33.748.5 3 sad260.91182.4369.221.8 4 xaf-51.9-125.3-82.8-4.6 5 eur4029.10115.3 6 naf-108.10194-44.2 7 mer-19.6-67.3-12.5-16.3 8 xeu-105.3-114.710.9-2.1 9 xam-23-50-73.5-15.2 10 xwo-453.7-1131.8-513.2-10.2 Total4209.41755.4-30.5

20. 20 Simulation – removal of domestic Farm subsidies in EU simu 250 % reduction in tf subsidy in EU primary factor in agri EVsadc3Subtotal 1Subtotal 2Subtotal 3Subtotal 4Subtotal 5Subtotal 6 bwa69.81.3-2.20.49.5-37.199.2 xsc2748.317.6-162.42.21175.2608.41130.4 sad18738.6-51.1-46.11342.7185.6432.8 xaf-264.612.1-0.70.7-16.4-45.4-10.3 eur4144.5-94.786.83.6-820.82059.5-171.7 naf41.86.83.2-0.8-34.9-153-15.3 mer-115.70.94.80.6-15.3-130.9-21.2 xeu-211.25.13.8-0.155.9-145.46.5 xam-161.81.20.30.1-59-30.96.3 xwo-2108.81.6-9.76.5-268.2-561.8-237

21. 21 3 rd Extension Closure Changes

22. 22 Closure changes: 1) Base: Unemployment in unsklab Change: employment is fixed ! swap qo("unsklab",sadc) = pfactreal ("unsklab",sadc); Welfare Effects: Main responsible: positive welfare endowments component caused by an increasing in employment Employment fixed UnemploymentDifference Botswana15.570.9+ 55.4 XSC (RSA)642.92766.7+ 2123.8 SAD645.31868.8+ 1223.5 EU1004.11082.8+ 78.7

23. 23 In both cases: the FTA caused: more production, more exports, etc So the labor demand increased If employment is: fixed: the wages goes up variable:labor goes up (wages are fixed) EV is bigger when employment is varying. Why? the wages didn’t change too much Hypothesis: qo is fixed (for all other endw) Data: no substitution from others to unsklab But the use of unsklab is bigger in all the sectors CONCLUSION: More labor more income welfare endowment up

24. 24 w/p L Ld L’d Full emp L fe L unp Ls full Ls unp Employment: fixed x variable

25. 25 Welfare decomposition by region – with tax replacement Welfare (US$m) Allocative efficiency Endowment effect Terms of trade Botswana-4813-6031.1 South Africa122373-42685.8 Rest of SADC20871-364437.1 EU9867900221.8 Total-412984-1437-17.9

26. 26 Tracing the effects…….. Consumption Taxes Unskilled employment Input demand Priv. domestic consumption Domestic production Negative endowment effect

27. 27 Selected key results tp Unsklab share to service sector qds (serv) qo (serv) qfe (unsklab, serv) qo (unsklab) %%% Botswana7.634-0.2 -4.7-5.6 South Africa2.428-0.7 -1.6-0.8 Rest of SADC8.317-3.2-4.2-8.4-2.8

28. 28 Conclusions The FTA between SADC and EU initiates an outward- looking strategy in the former region Partial tariff reductions can lead to gains for EU and losses for SADC No difference to SADC from EU domestic subsidy reductions Closure assumptions can have massive effects on outcomes