Article Id: ARCC1164 | Page : 104- 112
Citation :- IMPACT OF IMPORT DEMAND ON SOCIAL WELFARE OF MAIN WHEAT IMPORTING COUNTRIES.Indian Journal Of Agricultural Research.2011.(45):104- 112
A.R. Karbasi, F. Nikbakhshnoosar and S.M. Fahimifard*
Address : Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Zabol, Zabol, Iran. *Department of Agriculture, Shirvan branch, Islamic Azad University, Shirvan, Iran.


The main aim of this study is examination of import demand function and investigation of its effects on welfare by analyzing Simultaneous equation system during 1979 to 2008. In this study the results social welfare obtained using consumer surplus for the top four wheat importing countries (Algeria, Brazil, China and Egypt). The variable price of wheat export has a negative and significant effect on consumer surplus and social welfare that per one percent increase in wheat price elasticity, has reduced consumer surplus -1.11%, -0.5211%, -12.087% and  -0.0002% for the four countries mentioned, that has been slacked the level of social welfare.


Wheat importing countries Consumer surplus Compensation change Social welfare Simultaneous equations.


  1. Abrishami, H. (2002) Practical Economics. University of Tehran Publication, pp: 214, 215, 218, 219, 276.
  2. Beller, E. and Hout, M (2006) Welfare states and social mobility: how educational and social policy may affect cross-national differencesin the association between occupational origins and destinations. Research in Social Stratification and mobility, 23 (4).
  3. Brynjolfsson, E. and Smith, H. (2003) consumer surplus in the digital economy. estimating the value of increased product variety at on line book sellers. Manag. Sci., 49 : 1580-1596. http:// ebusiness. mit. edu/ research/ papers/ 176 erikb on line book sellers 2. pdf.
  4. Haddad, L. and. Ahmed, A.U. (2002) Avoiding cheronic and transitory poverty: evidence from Egypt, 1997-1999. food consumption and nutrition division of the international food policy research institute, discussion paper, 133: http:// agecon search. umn. edu/ bitstream/ 15921/ 1/ dp 02133 b. pdf.
  5. Hejbar, K. and. Ahmad, N.H. (2002) Estimating demand functions of wheat production and supply in Iran agriculture. Agric. Econ. Dev, 39 : 41-70.
  6. Houthakker, H.S. and Magee, S.P. (1969). Income and price elasticities in world trade. Rev. Econ. Statist, 51 : 111-125. http: //www. jstor. org/ pss/ 1926720.
  7. Just, R. E., Hueth, R. L., Schmitz, A. (2002) The economics of public policy. Prentice- Hall, New- York.
  8. Kong, H., Lynn kennedy, P. and Hilbun, B. (2009) An empirical stimation of the import demand model and welfare effects: the case of rice importing countries. Southern Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, pp: 1-24.
  9. Mahmoudi, V. (2004) Poverty. Iran J. Trade Study, 9: 129-153.
  10. Mukherjee, S. and. Benson, T. (2003) The determinants of poverty in Malawi, 1998. world dev., 31: 339-358. 10. 1016/ S0305- 750X(02) 00191- 2.
  11. McIntosh, C.S. and Wetzstein, M.E. 1995. Rational expectations ahouissoussi estimation of georgia soybesn actreage response. J. Agric. applied Econ, 27 : 500- 509.
  12. Corriston Steve, M.c. and MacLaren, D. (2005) The trade distorting effect of state trading enterprises in importing countries. European Economic Review, 49 : 1693- 1715.
  13. Noferesty, M. (1999) Single and Collective Root in Economics. 1st edn., Rasa Cultural Services Institution, Tehran.
  14. Palme, J. 2006. Welfare states and inequality: institutional designsand distributive outcome. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 23 : 4.
  15. Sayad­zadeh, A. and Mehdi A., (2006) Consideration social welfare function Nyasn statistics in Iran: An analysis theoretical and empirical. Econ. Lett., 12 : 123-138.
  16. Weber, G. (2003) Russia’s and. Kazakhstan’s agro-food sectors under liberalized agricultural trade a case for national product differentiation. Econ. Syst, 27 : 391-413. 10.1016/ j. ecosys. 2003. 11.002.
  17. Zellner, A. 1962. An efficient method of estinmating seemingly unrelated regressions and tests for aggregation bias. J. Am. Statist. Assoc, 57 : 348-368.

Global Footprints