**Table 4: Market price results of the CGE model** **<u>% changes from the basecase</u>**

|**Variables**|**branches**|<br>**Sim 1a**|<br>**Sim 1b**|<br>**Sim1c**|<br>**Sim2a**|**Sim2b**|**Sim2c**|**Sim2d**|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||crop agriculture|**-0,19**|**0,31**|**0,30**|**-0,15**|**-0,27**|**0,22**|**0,23**|
||rice|**-0,10**|**0,13**|**0,13**|**-0,10**|**-0,07**|**0,16**|**0,16**|
||export agriculture|**0,12**|**0,47**|**0,47**|**0,03**|**0,12**|**0,47**|**0,47**|
||jatropha|**-29,58**|**-29,71**|**-29,72**|**33,08**|**-23,33**|**-23,48**|**-23,47**|
||coton|**-0,19**|**0,00**|**-0,01**|**-0,05**|**-0,52**|**-0,33**|**-0,33**|
||Livestock|**-0,02**|**0,04**|**0,05**|**-0,06**|**0,02**|**0,08**|**0,07**|
||forestry|**-0,22**|**0,23**|**0,23**|**-0,18**|**-0,22**|**0,23**|**0,24**|
||mining|**-0,06**|**-0,19**|**-0,19**|**0,05**|**0,01**|**-0,12**|**-0,12**|
||agoindustry|**0,09**|**-0,05**|**-0,05**|**0,07**|**0,21**|**0,07**|**0,06**|
|**_Pq_**<br>(market|textile|**0,11**|**-0,07**|**-0,07**|**0,08**|**0,14**|**-0,04**|**-0,05**|
|<br>price)|other industries|**-0,10**|**-0,23**|**-0,23**|**0,05**|**-0,01**|**-0,14**|**-0,14**|
||other energy|**0,04**|**-0,18**|**-0,19**|**0,08**|**-0,07**|**-0,29**|**-0,28**|
||biofuel|**-3,45**|**-3,65**|**-3,65**|**-0,08**|**-2,86**|**-3,06**|**-3,06**|
||construction|**-0,43**|**-0,65**|**-0,65**|**0,05**|**-0,45**|**-0,67**|**-0,67**|
||commerce|**0,83**|**0,41**|**0,40**|**0,10**|**0,20**|**-0,22**|**-0,19**|
||transport|**0,23**|**0,08**|**0,07**|**0,06**|**0,14**|**-0,02**|**-0,01**|
||services|**0,15**|**-0,10**|**-0,10**|**0,07**|**0,04**|**-0,20**|**-0,19**|
||banking & finance|**-0,04**|**-0,26**|**-0,27**|**0,06**|**-0,06**|**-0,28**|**-0,29**|
||public services|**0,21**|**0,05**|**0,04**|**0,06**|**0,24**|**0,08**|**0,06**|
||fossil fuels|**-0,28**|**-0,48**|**-0,48**|**0,06**|**-0,27**|**-0,47**|**-0,47**|

The strong price decreases for jatropha has a positive impact on the biofuel sector. It is also very interesting to note that the subsidy to biofuel (Scenario 2a) has a positive effect on jatropha production and price. This is because this is the only scenario where the policy shock is applied to biodiesel (i.e., consumption of biodiesel is subsidized) and not to jatropha cultivation, whereas land expansion for jatropha cultivation is considered in the rest of the scenarios. The subsidy also allows for a low decrease in price of biofuel in combination with a more than 20% increase in output by the sector. When we combine this simulation 2a with the increase in land for jatropha production (sim2b), we greatly reduce the demand side pressure on jatropha with the supply effect and we observe a strong decrease in the price of jatropha (-23%). It is also interesting to highlight that the market prices of other agricultural goods all increase when jatropha competes with these sectors of land and these prices decrease for most sectors when there is no competition (sim1a and sim 2b). These differentiated effects will play an important role in determining the distributional impact of these simulations.

The results for changes in the rental rate of capital for the non-agricultural sectors are presented in Table 5 . Since the capital is fixed, each sector has a specific rental rate of capital. Not surprisingly the biofuel sector experiences a very strong increase in returns in all simulations since all scenarios are favorable to this sector. In the first simulation (sim1a), the fossil fuels, the construction and service sectors exhibit decreases around or above 2%.

18