آثار اصلاح یارانهی غذا بر تولید و سهم عوامل تولید در ایران: کاربرد مدل تعادل عمومی قابل محاسبه

محورهای موضوعی : فصلنامه علمی -پژوهشی تحقیقات اقتصاد کشاورزی

آیت اله کرمی ¹ (استادیار گروه اقتصادکشاورزی دانشگاه یاسوج)
بهاءالدین نجفی ² (استاد بخش اقتصادکشاورزی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد مرودشت.)
عبدالکریم اسماعیلی ³ (دانشیار بخش اقتصادکشاورزی دانشگاه شیراز)

تاریخ دریافت : 1394/09/29 تاریخ پذیرش : 1394/09/29 تاریخ انتشار : 1389/10/01

کلید واژه: ایران, تعادل عمومی قابل محاسبه, یارانهی غذا,

چکیده مقاله :

پرداخت یاران هها یکی از سیاستهای حمایتی دولت از بخشهای اجتماعی و اقتصادی م یباشد و یکی از اهداف اجتماعی برقراری یارانه، حمایت از اقشار محروم، کاهش فاصلهی طبقاتی و افزایش رفاه عمومی است. بخش اصلی یارانهی غذا در ایران به صورت همگانی بوده و باعث افزایش هزینههای دولت شده است. در این مطالعه، آثار اصلاح یارانهی غذا در حالتهای گوناگون بر تولید و سهم عوامل با بکارگیری مدل تعادل عمومی قابل محاسبه بر پایهی ماتریس حسابداری اجتماعی سال 1380 مورد بررسی قرار گرفته است. نتایج بررسی نشان داد به استثنای سیاست پرداخت نقدی که باعث افزایش تولید کالاهای غیرکشاورزی میشود، سایر سیاستها منجر به کاهش تولید همهی کالاهای مورد بررسی میشود. تمامی سیاستها درآمد نیروی کار را کاهش داده که این مسئله ناشی از کاهش تولید در بخشهای گوناگون و در نتیجه کاهش تقاضای نیروی کار میباشد، اما در مورد سرمایه، سیاستهای حذف و هدفمندی کالایی یارانهی غذا در ایران درآمد سرمایه را کاهش داده و سیاستهای پرداخت نقدی یارانهی غذا به شکل هدفمند و غیر هدفمند منجر به افزایش درآمد این عامل تولید میشود. لذا، سیاستهای هدفمندی یارانهی غذا به دلیل اینکه کمترین پیامد منفی بر تولید را داشته و از سوی دیگر، باعث حمایت از اقشار نیازمند جامعه و کاهش مخارج دولت میگردد، پیشنهاد شده است.  

چکیده انگلیسی:

The major part of the subsidy in Iran is general and not targeted and it is believed to be ineffective and costly. In recent years, the government has taken steps toward reforming food subsidy. The aim of this study was to investigate impacts of Iranian food subsidy reform policies on production and share of production factors using Computable General Equilibrium Model. (CGE). The results showed that cash food subsidy would increase production in non-agriculture sector. Cash and food stamps subsidies would reduce share of labor income that cause production in various sectors to reduce. Also targeting and non-targeting food subsidies cause a slight increase in share of capital income. It is suggested that in implementing subsidy reform their effects on macroeconomic variables should be considered. Finally, targeted food subsidy programs were recommended because they had least negative effects on production and would reduce government expenditure substantially.  

منابع و مأخذ:

1- Adams, R.H. 1998. Self –Targeted subsidies: The distributional impact of the

Egyptian food subsidy system. World Bank. Washington, D.C.

2- Adelman, I. and Robinson, S. 1986. U.S. agriculture in a general equilibrium

framework: analysis with a social accounting matrix. American Journal of

Agricultural Economics. 68 (5): 1196-1207.

3- Ahmadvand, M. R. and Eslami, S. 2005. A survey on Iran’s subsidies trend.

Commercial Surveys. 2(13): 4-15.

4- Ahmed, A., Bouis, H.W., Gutner, T. and Loِfgren, H. 2001. The Egyptian

food subsidy system structure, performance, and options for reform research.

International Food Policy Research Institute Washington, D.C.

5- Ahmed, A. U. and Bouis, H. E. 2002. Weighing what's practical: Proxy

means tests for targeting food subsidies in Egypt, International Food Policy

Research Institute, Discussion Paper, No. 132. Washington, D.C.

6- Ahmed, A. and Bouis, H. 1998. A review of international experience on food

subsidy programs: Lessons learned for Egypt. IFPRI, Washington, D.C.

7- Alderman, I. and Lindert, K. 1998. The potential and limitations of selftargeted

food subsidies. The World Bank Research. 13 (2): 213-239.

8- Akbari moghadam, B. 2009. Computable general equilibrium (a standard

form), Farhikhtgan Publications, Tehran.

9- Askari, M. 2004, Application of general equilibrium models in Iran,

Quarterly Iranian Economical Researches, 23: 11-51.

10- Askari, M. 2005. Application of general equilibrium models In Iran: based

on social accounting matrix, Iranian Economic Research Center, Faculty of

Economics, Allameh Tabatabaei University. 

11- Bohringer, C. Rutherford, T. and Wiegard, W. 2004. Computable general

equilibrium analysis: Opening a black box, Discussion Paper No: 03-56, Center

for European Economic Research.

12- Dervis, K. DeMelo, J. and. Robinson, S. 1982. General equilibrium models

for development Policy. Cambridge University Press, London.

13- Devarajan, S. Robinson, S. 2002. The influence of computable of general

equilibrium models on policy. International Food Policy Research Institute,

Washington, D.C.

14- Farrar, C. 2000. A review of food subsidy research at IFPRI. International

Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, D.C.

15- Gutner, T. 2002. The political economy of food subsidy reform: the case of

Egypt. Food Policy 27: 455–476.

16- Hossaini, S. SH. Maleki, A. 2005. Method of subsidy and its selection

criteria to evaluate the experience of selected countries and Iran, Commercial

Surveys. 13: 16-25.

17- Jensen, J. and Tarr, D. 2003. Trade, Exchange rate, and energy pricing

reform in Iran: Potentially large effects and gains to the poor, Review of

Development Economics, 7(4): 543-562.

18- Lofgren, H. 1999. Exercises in general equilibrium modeling Using

GAMS. International Food Policy Research Institute. Washington, D.C.

19- Lofgren, H., Harris, R.L. and Robinson, S. 2002. A standard computable

general equilibrium (CGE) model in GAMS. International Food Policy

Research Institute. Washington, D.C.

20- Lofgren, H. and El-Said, M. 1999. A general equilibrium analysis of

alternative scenarios for food subsidy reform in Egypt, International Food

Policy Research Institute, Washington, D.C.

21- Management and Planning Organization. 2001. Statistical Center of Iran,

expenditure and household income surveys, Tehran.

22- Mehrara, M. and Barkhordari, S. 2007. The Impacts of Iran's joining the

WTO on Employment and Value Added of Economic Sectors (CGE/AGE

Approach). Journal of Economical Researches, 8:171-194.

23- Mojtahed, A. 1999. Investigation of the effects of subsidy bread and

decrease it on Economy of Iran. Collected Research Paper of Economic of

Wheat. 337-367.

24- Motavaseli, M. Fouladi, M. 2006. The Effects of global oil price on GDP

and employment in Iran using a computed general equilibrium model, Journal

of Economical Researches, 76: 51-76.

25- Najafi, B. 2006. Investigating the world experiences about food subsidy.

The Institute of Agricultural Economics and planning Researches. 

26- Nasser, S. and Gomaa, S. 1998. Politics and policies of food subsidies in

Egypt. Public Administration Research and Consultation Center Fund, Cairo

University.

27- Permeh, Z. 2005. The effects of necessary commodities price on CPI using

the social accounting matrix, Journal of Economical Researches. 15: 51-68. (In

Persian)

28- Piraee, K. and Akbari moghaddam, B. 2005. The effect of subsidy reduction

in agriculture sector and the changes in labor tax on sectoral production and the

revenues of urban and rural household in Iran. Iranian Economic Research. 22:

1-30. (In Persian)

29- Pinstrup-Andersen, P. 1986. Food subsidies in developing countries,

International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, D.C.

30- Pyatt, G. and Rose, A. 1977. Social Accounting for development planning

with special reference to Sri Lanka, Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

31- Rahimi, A. and Kalantari, A. 1996. Economical investigation of subsidy",

The Institute of Commercial Researches and Studies. Third Edition, Tehran. (In

Persian)

32- Salami, H. Saraee Shad, Z. 2010.Effects of removal of fuel subsidy on

wheat price in Iran. Journal of Agricultural Economics Researches, 2(6): (In

Persian)

33- Shoven, J. B. and Whalley, J. 1992. Applying general equilibrium,

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

34- Thurlow, J. and Van Seventer, D. 2002. A standard computable general

equilibrium model for South Africa, Discussion Paper No. 100, IFPRI,

Washington, D.C.

35- Thurlow, J. and Wobst, P. 2003. Poverty-focused Social accounting

matrices for Tanzania, Discussion Paper No. 112, IFPRI, Washington, D.C.

36- Thissen, M. 1998. Two decades of CGE modeling: Lessons from models for

Egypt, SOM Research Report 99C02. University of Groningen. Groningen,

Netherlands.

37- Yao, S. and Liu, A. 2000. Policy analysis in a general equilibrium

framework. Journal of Policy Modeling, 22(5): 589-610.