This study has estimated the economic impacts of ongoing and future infrastructure development projects in Nepal by using the geographical simulation model developed by the Institute of Developing Economies (IDE-GSM). The IDE-GSM is a computational general equilibrium model based on spatial economics. The simulation analysis reveals that ongoing infrastructure development projects in Nepal benefit the country’s economy and that the planned connectivity improvement with India will have a positive impact, with an anticipated major shift in the mode of transport for trade.
CormenT. H., LeisersonC. E., RivestR. L., & CliffordS. (2001). Introduction to algorithms. The MIT Press.
2.
DeP., & RaychaudhuriA. (2013). Trade facilitation and poverty reduction in Asia and the Pacific: A case study of a South Asian Economic Corridor (No. 131). ARTNeT Working Paper Series.
3.
FujitaM., KrugmanP., & VenablesA. J. (1999). The spatial economy–Cities, regions, and international trade. The MIT Press.
4.
HeadK., & MayerT. (2000). Non-Europe: The magnitude and causes of market fragmentation in Europe. Weltwirschaftliches Arciv, 136, 285–314.
5.
HummelsD. (1999). Toward a geography of trade costs. GTAP Working Paper. No. 17. Center for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue University.
6.
IsonoI., & KumagaiS. (2013). Dawei revisited: Reaffirmation of the importance of the project in the era of reforms in Myanmar. ERIA Policy Brief, 1.
7.
Kaiun ShukaijoN. (1983). Distance tables for world shipping(8th ed.). Yokohama.
8.
KeolaS., & KumagaiS. (2016). Measuring population mobility speed from space. No. 574. Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization (JETRO).
9.
KrugmanP. (1991). Increasing returns and economic geography. Journal of Political Economy, 99, 483–499.
10.
KumagaiS., & IsonoI. (2011). Economic impacts of enhanced ASEAN–India connectivity: Simulation results from IDE/ERIA-GSM. In KimuraF. and UmezakiS. (Eds.), ASEAN–India connectivity: The comprehensive Asia development plan, Phase II. ERIA Research Project Report2010-7, 243–307. ERIA.
11.
KumagaiS., HayakawaK., IsonoI., KeolaS., & TsubotaK. (2013). Geographical simulation analysis for logistics enhancement in Asia. Economic Modelling, 34, 145–153.
12.
KumagaiS., IsonoI., KeolaS., HayakawaK., GokanT., & TsubotaK. (2017). China-Kyrgyzstan railway meets IDE-GSM (No. 630). Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization (JETRO).
13.
KumagaiS., IsonoI., & TsubotaK. (2018). Analysis of economic potentials of infrastructure developments in and around Bhutan (No. 702). Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization (JETRO).
14.
MeleckyM., GoswamiA., OkamuraA., & OverfieldD. (2018). The Web of Transport Corridors in South Asia. Washington, DC:World Bank.
15.
PugaD., & VenablesA. J. (1996). The spread of industry: Spatial agglomeration in economic development. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 10(4), 440–464.
16.
RobertsM., DeichmannU., FingletonB., & ShiT. (2012). Evaluating China’s road to prosperity: A new economic geography approach. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 42(4), 580–594.
17.
Rodríguez-PoseA., & FitjarR. D. (2013). Buzz, archipelago economies and the future of intermediate and peripheral areas in a spiky world. European Planning Studies, 21(3), 355–372.
18.
TeixeiraA. C. (2006). Transport policies in light of the new economic geography: The Portuguese experience. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 36, 450–466.
19.
WarrP., MenonJ., & YusufA. A. (2009). Regional economic impacts of cross-border infrastructure: A general equilibrium application to Thailand and Lao PDR(No. 35). ADB Working Paper Series on Regional Economic Integration.
