Trade and Poverty in the Poor Countries

By J. Bhagwati, T. Srinivasan. 2002

424 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Development, Economics and Econometrics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/afa62bf419fa87b89f2452dcb08ee9d03803d26f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Development

1. M. Maertens
2. Francisco Rodríguez
3. Jo Swinnen
4. Ann E. Harrison
5. Muhammad Shahbaz

In Economics and Econometrics

1. M. Maertens
2. Jo Swinnen
3. Liesbeth Colen
4. Steven Si
5. Faridul Islam
6. Muhammad Shahbaz
7. Francisco Rodríguez
8. John B. Cullen

Citations in the corpus

• Openness and Growth: What Have We Learned? (2006, background): “When one writes that “No country in the world had as rapid growth as China whereas fewer than ten countries exceeded the Indian growth rate” (Bhagwati and Srinivasan, 2002) a cross-national comparison is being made.”
• The Social Impact of Globalization in the Developing Countries (2006, neutral): “…stability implies low inflation, trade should affect the poor positively because the poor tend to be the hardest hit by increasing inflation (see Bhagwati and Srinivasan, 2002); tough liberalization may also involve cautious and restrictive macroeconomic policies with the opposite effect (see…”
• Globalization and Poverty: An Introduction (2005, background): “One could, for example, construct models where openness fails to raise aggregate growth or where the increase in aggregate income bypasses the incomes of the poor—for example, trade might induce technical change which is labor-saving (see, for example, Bhagwati and Srinivasan (2002)).”
• Financial development and income inequality in Pakistan: An application of ARDL approach (2011, background): “Bhagwati and Srinisvasan (2002) in a seminal article wrote, “While freer trade, or “openness” in trade, is now widely regarded as economically benign, in the sense that it increases the size of the pie, the recent anti-globalization critics have suggested that it is socially malign on several dimens”
• Trade, Standards, and Poverty: Evidence from Senegal (2009, background): “While some advocate participation in international trade as a major potential engine for global poverty reduction (Aksoy and Beghin, 2005; Anderson and Martin, 2005; Bhagwati and Srinivasan, 2002; Dollar and Kraay, 2004), in a broad survey of the evidence, Winters et al (2004, pp.”
• Assessing Economic Liberalization Episodes: A Synthetic Control Approach (2013, background): “Bhagwati and Srinivasan (2002) question cross-country evidence on the openness-growth nexus on a more fundamental level and promote descriptive case studies as a way to avoid the pitfalls of standard cross-country evidence.”
• How Much Do Trading Partners Matter for Economic Growth? (2004, neutral): “For more recent literature reviews, see Greenaway, Morgan, and Wright (1998); Bhagwati and Srinivasan (2002); and Baldwin (2003).”
• Business, Entrepreneurship and Innovation Toward Poverty Reduction (2019, background): “Research ranging from trade policy and globalization (Pearce 2005; Bergh, Mirkina, and Nilsson 2016; Bhagwati and Srinivasan 2002; Dollar and Kraay 2004) to legal and institutional reform (Rodrik, Subramanian, and Trebbi 2004) to management (Bloom et al. 2013) are making dramatic progress on…”
• Does Trade Reduce Poverty?: A View from Africa (2014, background): “Bhagwati and Srinivasan (2002) distinguish two broad strands of argumentation when discussing the effects of freer trade on poverty: static and dynamic.”
• Globalization and Poverty in Senegal: A Worst Case Scenario? (2011, background): “Some authors point to evidence of povertyalleviating effects of trade (Ben-David, 1996; Bhagwati and Srinivasan, 2002; Dollar and Kraay, 2004”