@article{Block:174979,
      recid = {174979},
      author = {Block, Steven A.},
      title = {Agriculture and economic growth in Ethiopia: growth  multipliers from a four-sector simulation model},
      journal = {Agricultural Economics: The Journal of the International  Association of Agricultural Economists},
      address = {1999-05},
      number = {968-2016-75753},
      pages = {12},
      year = {1999},
      abstract = {Agriculture accounts for over half of Ethiopian GDP, yet  the case for agriculture as a focus of economic growth  strategies must
rely on identifying a set of intersectoral  linkages through which agricultural growth contributes to  the growth of nonagriculture
in the Ethiopian economy. This  article develops a four-sector numerical simulation model  of economic growth in
Ethiopia which permits the  calculation of macroeconomic growth multipliers resulting  from income shocks to agriculture,
services, modern  industry, and traditional industry. The resulting growth  multipliers are 1.54 for agriculture, 1.80 for  services,
1.34 for modern industry, and 1.22 for  traditional industry. These results depict an economy in  which intersectoral linkages
operate on a highly uneven  basis. These limits are reflected in the wide disparity  between sectoral growth multipliers and by
substantial  differences in the patterns of their decomposition. The  policy relevance of these findings relate, in part, to  the
distributional implications of growth in particular  sectors. Poverty in Ethiopia is disproportionately rural.  An income shock to
agriculture is clearly the most  progressive choice, indicating the need to highlight  agricultural development in growth
strategies for Ethiopia.  Yet, the simulation results further indicate that doing so  imposes relatively little trade off against total
benefit.  While a $1 service sector income shock generates $0.80 in  indirect benefits, a $1 agricultural income shock  still
generates $0.54 in indirect gains - a somewhat  smaller benefit, bnt one likely to make the greatest  possible impact on poverty
reduction. © 1999 Elsevier  Science B.V. All rights reserved.},
      url = {http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/174979},
      doi = {https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.174979},
}