The key impacts of the two alternative variants at 2025 are analyzed below. Unless otherwise stated, the impacts are expressed as deviations from the reference case which rep­resents no trade liberalization or reduced sectoral protec­tion throughout the projection period. It should be noted that the impacts of trade policy changes only represent static gains/losses associated with resource reallocation and do not encapsulate any potential dynamic gains/losses associ­ated with any long-run productivity changes. Furthermore, except for the trade policies in question, all other policies remain unchanged as in the reference case.

     Figure 5-24 shows the overall impacts of trade liberal­ization under variant 1 in terms of changes in gross regional product (a regional equivalent to GDP). The world econ­omy is projected to benefit from multilateral trade liberal­ization. In particular, gross regional products in CWANA and SSA regions are projected to grow the most, by more than 2% relative to the reference case at 2025. However, about two-fifths of the global benefits (in today's dollars) are projected to accrue to the ESAP region. Interestingly, while the removal of trade barriers under variant 1 is pro­jected to increase income and food consumption, the global structure of food production appears to undergo significant changes. Compared with the reference case, a significant increase in meat production is projected to occur in LAC and SSA regions with a substantial decline projected for the NAE region (Figure 5-25). The structural change in global production of nonmeat food is not as striking as in the case of meat. In nonmeat production, LAC and SSA regions are projected to register the most growth relative to the refer­ence case at 2025 (Figure 5-26).

     There is an increase globally in overall trade volume under liberalization, with a noticeably larger effect, relative to the reference case, in 2025 (soon after the liberalization is complete), compared with 2050 (Figure 5-27). Figure 5-28 presents changes in cereal production as a result of the trade liberalization variant. The removal of protection for impor­tant cereals in North Africa leads to a decline in production in the CWANA region, as well as in the NAE region. On the other hand, production in ESAP, SSA, and LAC increases. Trade liberalization leads to increased prices for cereals and meats in 2025 (Figure 5-29), but prices decline again some­what in the later period.

     While estimates of the benefits of removal of global ag­ricultural subsidies and trade restrictions vary, other analy­ses have found similarly positive outcomes for Africa. One study finds that under full global agricultural trade liberal­ization (complete removal of trade barriers), Africa would receive  annual net economic  benefits  of US$5.4  billion (Rosegrant et al., 2005). Another study indicated that Euro­pean Union agricultural policies have reduced Africa's total potential agricultural exports by half. Without these agri­cultural policies, the current US$10.9 billion food-related exports annually from SSA could actually grow to nearly US$22 billion (Asideu, 2004).

     Under variant 2 in which trade protection will be dou­bled between 2010 and 2020, all broad regional economies are projected to decline relative to the reference case (Figure 5-30). Again, CWANA and SSA regions are projected to be affected the most, declining by about 1.5% relative to the reference case at 2025.

Figure 5-24. Projected impacts on gross regional product of trade liberalisation under variant 1 at 2025. Source: GTEM.

Figure 5-25. Projected impacts on meat production under variant 1 at 2025. Source: GTEM.

Figure 5-26. Projected impacts on nonmeat food production under variant 1 at 2025. Source: GTEM.