You are looking at 1 - 5 of 5 items for :

  • Farm produce x
  • Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics?Environmental and Ecological Economics x
  • Commodities x
  • Economic theory and methods x
  • Macroeconomics x
Clear All
Diogo Miguel Salgado Baptista, Mrs. Mai Farid, Dominique Fayad, Laurent Kemoe, Loic S Lanci, Ms. Pritha Mitra, Tara S Muehlschlegel, Cedric Okou, John A Spray, Kevin Tuitoek, and Ms. Filiz D Unsal
Climate change is intensifying food insecurity across sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) with lasting adverse macroeconomic effects, especially on economic growth and poverty. Successive shocks from the war in Ukraine and COVID-19 pandemic have increased food prices and depressed incomes, raising the number of people suffering from high malnutrition and unable to meet basic food consumption needs by at least 30 percent to 123 million in 2022 or 12 percent of SSA’s population. Addressing the lack of resilience to climate change—that critically underlies food insecurity in SSA—will require careful policy prioritization against a backdrop of financing and capacity constraints. This paper presents some key considerations and examples of tradeoffs and complementarities across policies to address food insecurity. Key findings include (1) Fiscal policies focused on social assistance and efficient public infrastructure investment can improve poorer households’ access to affordable food, facilitate expansion of climate-resilient and green agricultural production, and support quicker recovery from adverse climate events; (2) Improving access to finance is key to stepping up private investment in agricultural resilience and productivity as well as improving the earning capacity and food purchasing power of poorer rural and urban households; and (3) Greater regional trade integration, complemented with resilient transport infrastructure, enables sales of one country’s bumper harvests to its neighbors’ facing shortages. The international community can help with financial assistance—especially for the above-mentioned social assistance and key infrastructure areas—capacity development, and facilitating transfers of technology and know-how.
International Monetary Fund
The staff report for the Second Review under the Three-Year Arrangement under the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility (PRGF) highlights Benin’s macroeconomic framework. All quantitative performance criteria (PC) and benchmarks for the period through end-December 2006 were observed, but one structural performance criterion and one structural benchmark were missed. Reform of the civil service pension fund is urgently needed. Benin’s newly issued Growth and Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (GPRSP) places renewed emphasis on private sector-led economic growth.
Hang Sheng Cheng

OVER THE LAST TWENTY YEARS, and especially since the end of World War II, there have appeared a large number of statistical estimates of the numerical values to be assigned to the main structural parameters governing international trade relationships, i.e., the various foreign trade “elasticities” and “propensities.” These estimates, which are of importance to all those concerned with studying the mechanism of balance of payments adjustments, are, however, scattered in many publications. An economist interested in knowing, for instance, the magnitude of the income elasticity of demand for imports by a certain country, or the price elasticity of its demand for the import of a certain commodity, might have some difficulty in tracking down the various estimates that have been made. There is as yet no published study that gathers together existing estimates of elasticities and propensities on international trade and presents them in a systematic way for convenient reference.

THE DEVALUATIONS of September 1949 stand in sharp contrast to those of the thirties in that nearly all of them took place within a short period of time and were not, as in the thirties, carried through piecemeal.1 This makes it possible to construct a simple theoretical model by means of which the impact of devaluation on the prices of raw materials may be studied. A formula may be derived for the estimation of this effect and, under certain conditions which can be regarded as normal, this formula depends only on the extent of the devaluation and the relative shares of the devaluing and non-devaluing areas in the total supply of and demand for the product under consideration. In theory, the effect also depends on the elasticities of demand and supply in the devaluing and non-devaluing areas. In fact, however, for commodities of which less than one fourth of the combined supplies of the two areas is traded between the areas, the influence of different elasticities on the effect of the devaluation is slight. Consequently, as long as less than one quarter of the total supply moves between the two areas, the simplified formula provides a satisfactory approximation.