Beyond Model Accuracy: Comparing GTAP and GLOBIOM for Environmental Governance, Transparency, and Climate Justice in the Global South-A Critical Review

Abstract

Global land-use models increasingly shape assessments of biofuel sustainability, agricultural trade, deforestation and climate mitigation, yet the implications of their methodological choices for the Global South remain insufficiently examined. This qualitative literature review critically compares the Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) family, especially GTAP-BIO, with the Global Biosphere Management Model (GLOBIOM). Drawing on peer-reviewed research published from 2020 to 2026, the analysis integrates economic-model architecture, indirect land-use change, ecological accounting, uncertainty, reproducibility and environmental justice. Seven thematic findings emerge: structural non-equivalence; sensitivity of land-use and carbon estimates to assumptions; incompleteness of carbon-centric environmental indicators; spatial and social asymmetries in policy impacts; uneven representation of 
smallholders and Indigenous peoples; insufficiently standardised transparency; and opportunities for complementary rather than competitive model use. Evidence from Indonesia, Brazil and Africa suggests that model-based trade and climate rules can interact with pre-existing inequalities, although such effects are contingent rather than inherent to either model. The paper proposes a Transparent and Just Environmental Modelling Framework requiring scenario harmonisation, ecological triangulation, uncertainty disclosure, participatory appraisal, distributive safeguards and independent review. It concludes that modelling legitimacy depends on fitness for purpose, traceable evidence and accountable policy interpretation, not solely on numerical 
precision or model complexity.