
Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)
Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)
Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)
Linking CGE and microsimulation models: A comparison of different approaches
- Article
- Figures and data
- Jump to
Figures
Tables
Description of the subscripts for the microsimulation model.
m | Households | m = 1, 2, …, 24 | |
i | Individuals belonging to household m | i = 1, …, NCm | (NCm: number of components of household m) |
q | Goods | q = 1,2 |
Direct income tax rates.
Household Income | Tax rate |
---|---|
Up to 10,000 | 0% |
Up to 15,000 | 15% |
Up to 26,000 | 24% |
Up to 70,000 | 32% |
Over 70,000 | 39% |
Heckman selection model, two-step estimates.
Coefficient | Std. Error | z | P>|z| | |
---|---|---|---|---|
constant | 7.0321 | 0.3145 | 22.36 | 0.000 |
ln(age) | 0.6978 | 0.0833 | 8.38 | 0.000 |
sex | −0.4662 | 0.1018 | −4.58 | 0.000 |
qualification | 0.3966 | 0.0772 | 5.14 | 0.000 |
education | 0.5250 | 0.0872 | 6.02 | 0.000 |
Mills ratio | 0.2160 | 0.1473 | 1.47 | 0.143 |
Selection | ||||
ln(age) | 0.3386 | 0.0807 | 4.19 | 0.000 |
sex | −1.5492 | 0.2803 | −5.53 | 0.000 |
qualification | 1.0204 | 0.2729 | 3.74 | 0.000 |
children under 6 | 0.1682 | 0.2368 | 0.71 | 0.478 |
region | −0.7515 | 0.2980 | −2.52 | 0.012 |
rho | 0.7628 | |||
sigma | 0.2832 |
-
Notes: Dependent variable: logarithm of wage.
Binary logit model of labour status choice.
Coefficient | Std. Error | z | P>|z| | |
---|---|---|---|---|
ln(real wage) | 0.1972 | 0.0465 | 4.25 | 0.000 |
sex | −1.8948 | 0.4078 | −4.65 | 0.000 |
qualification | 1.4408 | 0.4257 | 3.38 | 0.001 |
region | −0.7185 | 0.3295 | −2.18 | 0.029 |
children under 6 | 0.2691 | 0.2973 | 0.91 | 0.365 |
education | −0.7633 | 0.6717 | −1.14 | 0.256 |
Mean dependent var | 0.6647 | S.D. dependent var | 0.4735 | |
S.E. of regression | 0.3767 | Akaike info criterion | 0.9015 | |
Sum squared resid | 23.2688 | Schwarz criterion | 1.0122 | |
Log likelihood | −70.6305 | Hannan-Quinn criter. | 0.9464 | |
Avg. log likelihood | −0.4155 |
-
Notes: Dependent Variable: Activity Status.
SAM of the economy.
C1 | C2 | S1 | S2 | K | L | H | G | SI | RoW | Total | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C1 | 57.5 | 15.5 | 95.2 | 61.2 | 30.3 | 23.5 | 283.3 | ||||
C2 | 17.1 | 23.5 | 312.8 | 48.5 | 14.2 | 76.5 | 492.5 | ||||
S1 | 283.3 | 283.3 | |||||||||
S2 | 492.5 | 492.5 | |||||||||
K | 72.2 | 23.0 | 13.1 | 108.3 | |||||||
L | 83.2 | 353.8 | 116.4 | 553.4 | |||||||
H | 108.3 | 553.4 | 39.8 | 701.5 | |||||||
G | 12.3 | 17.7 | 249.0 | 279.0 | |||||||
SI | 44.5 | 44.5 | |||||||||
RoW | 41.0 | 59.0 | 100.0 | ||||||||
Total | 283.3 | 492.5 | 283.3 | 492.5 | 108.3 | 553.4 | 701.5 | 269.9 | 44.5 | 100.0 |
-
Notes: Cq: consumption of good q; Sq: production sector q; K: capital account; L: labour account; H: representative household account; G: public sector; SI: savings-investments account, RoW: Rest of the World account.
Values of some parameters for the CGE model.
Sector 1 | Sector 2 | |
---|---|---|
Elasticity of substitution (EOS) in production function (aggregation of capital and labour) | 0.7 | 0.5 |
Elasticity of substitution for Armington composite good | 0.7 | 1.2 |
Elasticity of transformation for exports and domestic production delivered to the domestic market | −2.0 | −3.0 |
Initial tariff rates on imports | 0.3 | 0.3 |
Initial time endowment | 656.7 | |
Wage elasticity of labour supply (estimated from the household survey) | −0.18665 |
Variables and parameters of the CGE model
Variables | Parameters | ||
---|---|---|---|
PK | Return to capital | ty | Income tax rate |
PL | Wage rate | tmq | Tariff rates on imports |
Pq | Price of Armington composite good | ε_LS | Wage elasticity of labour supply |
PDq | Price of output | mps | Marginal propensity to save |
PDDq | Price of domestically produced good delivered to domestic market | αHq | Cobb-Douglas power of commodity q in RH’s utility function |
PWEq | World price of exports (foreign currency) | αHl | Cobb-Douglas power of leisure in RH’s utility function |
PWMq | World price of imports (foreign currency) | αCGq | Cobb-Douglas power of commodity q in government utility function |
PMq | Price of imports (local currency) | αKG | Cobb-Douglas power of capital in government utility function |
PEq | Price of exports (local currency) | αLG | Cobb-Douglas power of labour in government utility function |
ER | Exchange rate | ioqs | Technical coefficients |
PC | Consumer price index | aFq | Efficiency parameter production function |
KS | Capital endowment (exogenous) | γFq | Share parameter in production function |
LS | Labour supply (endogenous) | σFq | EOS in firm q’s production function |
TS | Time endowment (exogenous) | aAq | Efficiency parameter in Armington function |
Xq | Domestic sales (Armington composite) | γAq | Share parameter in Armington function |
XDq | Domestic production | σAq | EOS in firm q’s Armington function |
XDDq | Domestically produced good delivered to domestic market | αIq | Cobb-Douglas power of commodity q in Bank’s utility function |
Mq | Imports | aTq | Efficiency parameter in CET function |
Eq | Exports | γTq | Share parameter in CET function |
Kq | Capital demand by firms | σTq | Elasticity of transformation in CET function |
Lq | Labour demand by firms | ||
Iq | Investment good | ||
Cq | Consumption demand by household | ||
Cl | Demand for leisure | ||
Y | Household’s income | ||
S | Household’s savings | ||
CBUD | Household’s consumption expenditure | ||
TF | Public transfers to household | ||
TAXREV | Tax revenues | ||
CGq | Consumption demand by government | ||
KG | Capital demand by government | ||
LG | Labour demand by government |
Equations of the CGE model
Description | Equations |
---|---|
Demand for consumption goods | |
Leisure | |
Labour supply | |
Savings | |
Consumer price index | |
CES production function | |
CES FOC for capital | |
Demand for investment goods | |
Price of imports in local currency | |
Price of exports in local currency | |
Armington function | |
Armington FOC for imports | |
CET function | |
CET FOC for exports | |
Market clearing condition for labour | |
Market clearing condition for capital | |
Market clearing condition for commodity q | |
Income definition | |
Disposable income minus savings | |
Zero profit condition in production function | |
Zero profit condition in Armington function | |
Zero profit condition in CET function | |
Demand of commodity q by government | |
Demand of capital by government | |
Demand of labour by government | |
Tax revenues |
Simulation results: percentage changes (CGE model).
Integrated Approach | Top-Down Approach | TD/BU Approach (C&LS) | TD/BU Approach (LS) | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Government Surplus | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
Wage Rate | −14.87 | −14.67 | −14.42 | −14.64 |
Capital Return | 19.70 | 19.30 | 17.91 | 19.13 |
Consumer Price Index | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
Exchange Rate | 53.83 | 53.76 | 53.83 | 53.70 |
Labour Supply | −1.00 | −1.18 | −1.32 | −1.32 |
Government Use of Labour | 4.82 | 4.23 | 3.72 | 4.06 |
Government Use of Capital | −25.45 | −25.45 | −24.72 | −25.43 |
Income* | −9.50 | −9.39 | −9.50 | −9.48 |
Disposable Income* | −9.50 | −9.39 | −9.50 | −9.48 |
Consumption Expenditure* | −9.50 | −9.39 | −7.90 | −9.48 |
Marginal Propensity to Save | 0.00 | 0.00 | −16.22 | 0.00 |
Savings* | −9.28 | −9.39 | −24.18 | −9.48 |
Tax Revenues | −9.28 | −9.48 | −9.63 | −9.58 |
-
*
For the integrated model, these changes are computed as average percentage changes across households.
Simulation results: percentage changes (CGE model).
Macro variables | Integrated Approach | Top-Down Approach | TD/BU Approach (C&LS) | TD/BU Approach (LS) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sector 1 | Sector 2 | Sector 1 | Sector 2 | Sector 1 | Sector 2 | Sector 1 | Sector 2 | |
Commodity Prices | −0.99 | 0.30 | −1.23 | 0.38 | −1.70 | 0.52 | −1.27 | 0.39 |
Domestic Sales | −8.69 | −12.52 | −8.81 | −12.54 | −10.21 | −12.05 | −8.88 | −12.64 |
Domestic Production | 27.81 | −14.20 | 27.91 | −14.31 | 26.77 | −13.86 | 27.84 | −14.43 |
Labour Demand | 43.52 | −13.22 | 43.05 | −13.36 | 41.08 | −12.94 | 42.88 | −13.48 |
Capital Demand | 13.07 | −26.82 | 13.14 | −26.72 | 12.72 | −25.84 | 13.15 | −26.76 |
Consumption* | −8.60 | −9.78 | −8.26 | −9.73 | −6.58 | −8.30 | −8.32 | −9.84 |
Investment | −7.65 | −8.84 | −8.26 | −9.73 | −22.87 | −24.57 | −8.32 | −9.84 |
Imports | −32.92 | −47.63 | −33.11 | −47.57 | −34.37 | −47.21 | −33.16 | −47.60 |
Exports | 207.36 | −78.38 | 209.23 | −78.53 | 209.10 | −78.48 | 209.11 | −78.59 |
-
*
For the integrated model, these changes are computed as average percentage changes across households.
Simulation results: Inequality indices on disposable per capita real income (MS model).
Benchmark Values | Integrated Approach* | Top-Down Approach* | TD/BU Approach (C & LS)* | TD/BU Approach (LS)* | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Gini Index | 31.85 | 3.02% | 1.68% | 1.52% | 1.66% |
Atkinson’s Index, ε = 0.5 | 8.46 | 4.94% | 3.01% | 2.72% | 2.97% |
Coefficient of Variation | 65.86 | 3.78% | 2.84% | 2.64% | 2.81% |
Generalized Entropy Measures: | |||||
I(c), c = 2 | 21.69 | 7.69% | 5.75% | 5.35% | 5.70% |
Mean Logarithmic Deviation, I(0) | 17.72 | 3.99% | 2.10% | 1.83% | 2.07% |
Theil Coefficient, I(1) | 17.82 | 5.89% | 3.89% | 3.58% | 3.85% |
-
*
Percentage deviations from benchmark values.
Simulation results: Poverty indices on disposable per capita real income (MS model).
Benchmark Values | Integrated Approach* | Top-Down Approach* | TD/BU Approach (C & LS)* | TD/BU Approach (LS)* | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
General Poverty Line | |||||
Headcount Index, P0 | 40.98 | 56.00% | 8.00% | 8.00% | 8.00% |
Poverty Gap Index, P1 | 9.84 | 119.46% | 27.25% | 27.01% | 27.21% |
Poverty Severity Index, P2 | 0.00 | 143.04% | 28.95% | 28.51% | 28.88% |
Extreme Poverty Line | |||||
Headcount Index, P0 | 4.92 | 166.67% | 33.33% | 33.33% | 33.33% |
Poverty Gap Index, P1 | 1.00 | 71.09% | 4.77% | 4.64% | 4.75% |
Poverty Severity Index, P2 | 0.00 | 45.33% | −0.03% | 0.03% | −0.03% |
-
*
Percentage deviations from benchmark values.
SAM of the economy made consistent with the Household Survey.
C1 | C2 | S1 | S2 | K | L | H | G | SI | RoW | Total | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C1 | 57.8 | 15.6 | 95.4 | 62.6 | 28.1 | 23.6 | 283.0 | ||||
C2 | 17.1 | 23.5 | 313.2 | 48.8 | 13.6 | 76.6 | 492.8 | ||||
S1 | 283.3 | 283.0 | |||||||||
S2 | 492.5 | 492.8 | |||||||||
K | 73.4 | 23.2 | 13.2 | 109.8 | |||||||
L | 81.7 | 353.8 | 117.5 | 552.6 | |||||||
H | 109.8 | 552.6 | 38.7 | 701.2 | |||||||
G | 12.3 | 17.7 | 250.8 | 280.8 | |||||||
SI | 41.7 | 41.7 | |||||||||
RoW | 40.8 | 59.4 | 100.2 | ||||||||
Total | 283.0 | 492.8 | 283.0 | 492.8 | 109.8 | 552.6 | 701.2 | 280.8 | 41.7 | 100.2 |
-
Notes: Cq: consumption of good q; Sq: production sector q; K: capital account; L: labour account; H: representative household account; G: public sector; SI: savings-investments account, RoW: Rest of the World account.
Simulation results with consistent data: Percentage changes (CGE model).
TD/BU Approach (C & LS) | TD/BU Approach (LS) | |
---|---|---|
Government Surplus | 0.00 | 0.00 |
Wage Rate | −14.63 | −14.81 |
Capital Return | 18.36 | 19.37 |
Consumer Price Index (num.) | 0.00 | 0.00 |
Exchange Rate | 53.90 | 53.80 |
Labour Supply | −1.18 | −1.18 |
Government Use of Labour | 4.13 | 4.42 |
Government Use of Capital | −24.89 | −25.48 |
Income | −9.45 | −9.43 |
Disposable Income | −9.45 | −9.43 |
Consumption Expenditure | −8.14 | −9.43 |
Marginal Propensity to Save | −14.13 | 0.00 |
Savings | −22.24 | −9.43 |
Tax Revenues | −9.57 | −9.52 |
Simulation results with consistent data: Percentage changes (CGE model).
TD/BU Approach (C & LS) | TD/BU Approach (LS) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Sec 1 | Sec 2 | Sec 1 | Sec 2 | |
Commodity Prices | −1.44 | 0.44 | −1.07 | 0.33 |
Domestic Sales | −9.86 | −12.06 | −8.89 | −12.55 |
Domestic Production | 26.77 | −13.80 | 27.65 | −14.27 |
Labour Demand | 41.65 | −12.85 | 43.17 | −13.30 |
Capital Demand | 12.70 | −25.99 | 13.05 | −26.76 |
Consumption | −7.13 | −8.45 | −8.45 | −9.73 |
Investment | −21.11 | −22.58 | −8.45 | −9.73 |
Imports | −34.12 | −47.30 | −33.10 | −47.63 |
Exports | 207.50 | −78.34 | 207.46 | −78.43 |
TD/BU-C&LS approach with consistent data: RH shares from CGE model used in the MS model (percentage changes, CGE model).
only ty | only ΔLS | only ηi & mps | ΔLS, ty, mps & ηi | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Marginal propensity to save Savings | 2.92 | −14.82 | −14.47 | 0.12 |
Savings | −6.78 | −22.87 | −22.55 | −9.33 |
Simulation results TD/BU approach: percentage changes (CGE model).
ΔLS & ty (inconsistent data) | ΔLS, ty, mps & ηi (inconsistent data) | ΔLS, ty, mps & ηi (consistent data) | |
---|---|---|---|
Government Surplus | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
Wage Rate | −14.70 | −14. 62 | −14.84 |
Capital Return | 19.43 | 18.95 | 19.46 |
Consumer Price Index (num.) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
Exchange Rate | 53.90 | 53.95 | 54.02 |
Labour Supply | −1.18 | −1.18 | −1.18 |
Government Use of Labour | 2.26 | 2.13 | 1.62 |
Government Use of Capital | −26.96 | −26.69 | −27.55 |
Income | −9.39 | −9.40 | −9.44 |
Disposable Income | −8.47 | −8.48 | −8.12 |
Consumption Expenditure | −8.47 | −7.93 | −8.14 |
Marginal Propensity to Save | 0.00 | −5.53 | 0.25 |
Savings | −8.47 | −13.54 | −7.89 |
Tax Revenues | −10.95 | −10.97 | −11.60 |
Simulation results TD/BU approach: percentage changes (CGE model).
ΔLS & ty (inconsistent data) | ΔLS, ty, mps & ηi (inconsistent data) | ΔLS, ty, mps & ηi (consistent data) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sec 1 | Sec 2 | Sec 1 | Sec 2 | Sec 1 | Sec 2 | |
Commodity Prices | −1.21 | 0.37 | −1.38 | 0.42 | −1.09 | 0.33 |
Domestic Sales | −8.75 | −12.00 | −9.27 | −11.77 | −8.92 | −11.73 |
Domestic Production | 28.13 | −13.75 | 27.72 | −13.53 | 27.87 | −13.42 |
Labour Demand | 43.37 | −12.79 | 42.66 | −12.58 | 43.46 | −12.44 |
Capital Demand | 13.28 | −26.30 | 13.11 | −25.93 | 13.20 | −26.07 |
Consumption | −7.35 | −8.81 | −6.90 | −8.24 | −7.45 | −8.35 |
Investment | −7.35 | −8.81 | −12.33 | −13.91 | −6.88 | −8.19 |
Imports | −33.09 | −47.31 | −33.57 | −47.16 | −33.20 | −47.23 |
Exports | 210.17 | −78.31 | 210.17 | −78.27 | 208.79 | −78.11 |
Simulation results TD/BU approach: percentage changes (MS model).
ΔLS & ty (inconsistent data) | ΔLS, ty, mps & ηi (inconsistent data) | TD Approach (inconsistent data) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sec 1 | Sec 2 | Sec 1 | Sec 2 | Sec 1 | Sec 2 | |
Consumption | −7.23 | −8.28 | −7.45 | −8.35 | −7.21 | −8.28 |
Savings | −7.78 | −7.88 | −7.78 |
Inequality indices on disposable per capita real income (MS model).
Benchmark Values | ΔLS & ty (inconsistent data)* | ΔLS, ty, mps & ηi (consistent data)* | |
---|---|---|---|
Gini Index | 31.85 | 1.70% | 1.66% |
Atkinson’s Index, ε = 0.5 | 8.46 | 3.04% | 2.97% |
Coefficient of Variation | 65.86 | 2.86% | 2.81% |
Generalized Entropy Measures: | |||
I(c), c = 2 | 21.69 | 5.80% | 5.70% |
Mean Logarithmic Deviation, I(0) | 17.72 | 2.13% | 2.07% |
Theil Coefficient, I(1) | 17.82 | 3.93% | 3.85% |
-
*
Percentage deviations from benchmark values
Poverty indices on disposable per capita real income (MS model).
Benchmark Values | ΔLS & ty (inconsistent data)* | ΔLS, ty, mps & ηi (consistent data)* | |
---|---|---|---|
General Poverty Line | |||
Headcount Index, P0 | 40.98 | 8.00% | 8.00% |
Poverty Gap Index, P1 | 9.84 | 27.30% | 27.21% |
Poverty Severity Index, P2 | 0.00 | 29.01% | 28.88% |
Extreme Poverty Line | |||
Headcount Index, P0 | 4.92 | 33.33% | 33.33% |
Poverty Gap Index, P1 | 1.00 | 4.79% | 4.75% |
Poverty Severity Index, P2 | 0.00 | −0.03% | −0.03% |
-
*
Percentage deviations from benchmark values