DOCSLIB.ORG

QUANTITATIVE METHODS for TRADE-BARRIER ANALYSIS Also by Alexander Yeats

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
QUANTITATIVE METHODS for TRADE-BARRIER ANALYSIS Also by Alexander Yeats QUANTITATIVE METHODS FOR TRADE-BARRIER ANALYSIS Also by Alexander Yeats SHIPPING AND DEVELOPMENT POLICY *TRADE BARRIERS FACING DEVELOPING COUNTRIES *TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES: Leading Issues for the 1980s *Also published by Palgrave Macmillan Quantitative Methods for Trade-Barrier Analysis Sam Laird Senior Economist The World Bank, Washington, DC and Alexander Yeats Principal Economist The World Bank, Washington, DC M MACMILLAN © Sam Laird and Alexander Yeats 1990 Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1990 All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this publication may be made without written permission. No paragraph of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted save with written permission or in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, or under the terms of any licence permitting limited copying issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency, 33-4 Alfred Place, London WC1E 7DP. Any person who does any unauthorised act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages. First published 1990 Published by THE MACMILLAN PRESS LTD Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 2XS and London Companies and representatives throughout the world British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Laird, Sam Quantitative methods for trade-barrier analysis. 1. Foreign trade. Non-tariff controls I. Title II. Yeats, Alexander J. 382'.3 ISBN 978-1-349-11143-5 ISBN 978-1-349-11141-1 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-1-349-11141-1 Contents List of Tables vii List of Figures xii Acknowledgements xiii 1 Policy Issues Involving Nontarift' Trade Barriers 1 Informational needs for corrective policy action 2 The costs and consequences of protectionism 4 Implications of NTBs for trade and development policies 7 NTBs and the Uruguay Round 9 The trade potentials of the Socialist Countries 11 Outline and plan of the book 12 2 Quantitative Approaches to Trade-Barrier Analysis 15 The nontariff measure inventory approach 19 Economic effects of NTBs: a general analysis 24 Methods for quantifying specific nontariff barriers 37 Special purpose estimation procedures 48 3 Simulating the Effects of Trade Liberalisation 58 Basic features of partial equilibrium trade models 59 The data and parameters 60 Illustrative policy applications 65 4 The Implications of NTB Inventory Studies 88 The global importance of nontariff measures 88 The sectorial coverage of nontariff measures 94 National variations in nontariff measure usage 98 Nontariff measures in developing countries 107 5 Findings of Empirical Studies of Nontarift' Barriers 121 Studies based on the inventory approach 122 Studies of agricultural trade barriers 136 Studies relating to textiles and clothing 178 Studies relating to ferrous metals 200 Studies relating to other manufactured products 209 v vi Contents Appendix 1: Country-Product Classifications for Trade-Barrier Analysis 228 Appendix 2: Approximating the Effective Rate of Protection 236 Appendix 3: Tariff Protection in Developed and Developing Countries 239 Appendix 4: A Glossary of Nontariff Measures 244 Appendix 5: The Punta del Este Ministerial Declaration 252 Notes 260 Bibliography 290 fu~ E List of Tables 1.1 Findings of empirical studies relating to the economic costs and effects of contemporary protectionism 5 2.1 The UNCTAD classification scheme for nontariff trade control measures of a product-specific nature 17 2.2 Extent of industrial countries' nontariff measures in 1981 22 2.3 Tariff and nontariff barriers facing imports from selected heavily indebted developing countries in major developed country markets 23 2.4 Estimated nominal equivalents for nontariff barriers in France, Japan, Sweden and the United States, 1973 31 2.5 Regression results for bilateral trade flows between OECD countries, 1970 to 1973 34 2.6 Comparison of coverage and rates of protection from Swedish tariffs and variable levies 39 2.7 Estimated levels of tariff and NTB protection for clothing in selected countries, 1981-3 (ad valorem equivalents) 42 2.8 Analysis of the final outcome of anti-dumping and countervailing actions in the developed market economy countries, 1979-82 47 2.9 Elements entering the calculation of producer and consumer subsidy equivalents: an illustrative example 53 3.1 Information collated by IMF on tariff equivalents of tariff and nontariff barriers for seven sectors in four OECD markets 66 3.2 Analysis of the simulated increase in developing country export earnings in terms of major SITC product groups 68 3.3 Actual values and projected changes in exports and trade balances for selected developing countries due to the adoption of a GSTP 72 Vll viii List of Tables 3.4 Projected changes in the structure of developing countries' intra-trade in primary and processed commodities under preferential tariffs 74 3.5 Potential trade effects on developing countries from reducing trade barriers for agricultural exports 76 3.6 Potential absolute and percentage increase in exports of selected developing countries after trade liberalisation, by commodity 78 3.7 Summary of the main results of recent simulation studies on agricultural trade liberalisation 80 4.1 Frequency ratios and the share of OECD country non-petroleum imports subject of hard-core nontariff measures, 1981, 1983 and 1986 90 4.2 Frequency ratios and nontariff measure trade coverage ratios for individual OECD countries, 1981, 1983 and 1986 91 4.3 Analysis of the incidence of OECD country nontariff measures on different groups of exporting countries, 1981 and 1986 93 4.4 The incidence of OECD nontariff measures on imports of foodstuffs and agricultural raw materials, 1986 95 4.5 The incidence of OECD nontariff measures on imports of various manufactured products, 1986 97 4.6 The incidence of OECD country nontariff measures on imports from developed countries 100 4.7 The incidence of OECD country nontariff measures on imports from developing countries 102 4.8 Trade coverage of two-digit SITC agricultural imports by NTMs in the EEC, Japan and USA, 1986 104 4.9 Analysis of changes in the use of different forms of NTMs in OECD countries, 1981 to 1986 106 4.10 The application of product-specific nontariff measures by groups of selected developing countries 108 A4.1 The incidence of individual EEC country NTMs on imports of foodstuffs and agricultural raw materials, 1986 111 A4.2 The incidence of individual EEC country NTMs on imports of chemical products, 1986 112 A4.3 The incidence of individual EEC country NTMs on imports of various manufactured products, 1986 113 List of Tables tx A4.4 Trade coverage of two-digit SITC chemical imports by NTMs in the EEC, Japan and USA, 1986 114 A4.5 Trade coverage of two-digit SITC manufactured products by NTMs in the EEC, Japan and USA, 1986 115 A4.6 Analysis of the incidence and changes in EEC, Japan and US nontariff measures against foodstuffs, 1981-6 116 A4. 7 Analysis of the incidence and changes in EEC, Japan and US nontariff measures against textiles and clothing, 1981-6 118 A4.8 Analysis of the incidence and changes in EEC, Japan and US nontariff measures against ores and metals, 1981-6 120 5.1 Volume-restraining measures facing the exports of developing countries in selected developed market­ economy and developing countries, incidence on primary and processed commodities 126 5.2 Percent of 1967 imports subject to nontariff restrictions 130 5.3 Summary statistics on nontariff barriers facing eight industrial markets' imports 134 5.4 Estimated ad valorem equivalents for Japanese protection of agricultural products, 1955 to 1980 139 5.5 Tariff equivalents of EEC variable levies on selected agricultural products, 1969 and 1972 140 5.6 Import price, domestic price and estimated tariff equivalents for Japanese restrictions on agricultural commodities 142 5. 7 The level of agricultural price support in industrial countries 146 5.8 Ad valorem tariff equivalents of the combination of border protection and consumer price subsidies, 1970-80: Sweden and the European Community 148 5.9 European Community: nominal protection coefficients, 1975-80 150 5.10 Japan: Nominal protection coefficients, 1975-81 155 5.11 United States: nominal protection coefficients, 1975-80 157 5.12 Average trade barriers against nine foodstuffs exported by tropical underdeveloped countries 159 X List of Tables 5.13 Nominal tariffs, variable levies, and the effective rate of protection in Sweden, 1970: selected products of importance to developing countries 161 5.14 Comparison of nominal and effective rates of protection for selected agricultural products in the European Economic Community 163 5.15 Ad valorem tariff equivalents in Japan and the European Economic Community 165 5.16 Cost-benefit analysis of agricultural policy interventions in the USA, EEC and Japan 167 5.17 Estimated levels of protection for selected agricultural products in Western Europe in the early 1970s 168 5.18 Estimated ad valorem equivalents for EEC variable import levies applied to selected agricultural products, 1975-81 170 5.19 Nominal protection coefficients for producer and consumer prices of selected commodities in industrial countries, 198(}..-82 172 5.20 Nominal and effective protection in US agriculture, 1958 and 1963 173 5.21 Producer's subsidy equivalents by commodity by country 176 5.22 Estimates of nominal rates of protection for agriculture in ten developed countries 177 5.23 Arrangements affecting trade in textiles and clothing, 1961 to 1991 180 5.24 Approximate estimates of the cost to consumers
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Trade and Investment Effects of Preferential Trading Arrangements
    This PDF is a selection from a published volume from the National Bureau of Economic Research Volume Title: International Trade in East Asia, NBER-East Asia Seminar on Economics, Volume 14 Volume Author/Editor: Takatoshi Ito and Andrew K. Rose, editors Volume Publisher: University of Chicago Press Volume ISBN: 0-226-37896-9 Volume URL: http://www.nber.org/books/ito_05-1 Conference Date: September 5-7, 2003 Publication Date: August 2005 Title: The Trade and Investment Effects of Preferential Trading Arrangements Author: Philippa Dee, Jyothi Gali URL: http://www.nber.org/chapters/c0193 5 The Trade and Investment Effects of Preferential Trading Arrangements Philippa Dee and Jyothi Gali The number of preferential trading arrangements (PTAs) has grown dra- matically over the last decade or so. By the end of March 2002, there were 250 agreements in force that had been notified to the World Trade Organi- zation (WTO), compared with 40 in 1990 (WTO 2002). The coverage of preferential trading arrangements has also tended to expand over time. The preferential liberalization of tariffs and other mea- sures governing merchandise trade remains important in many agreements. But they increasingly cover a range of other issues—services, investment, competition policy, government procurement, e-commerce, labor, and en- vironmental standards. This paper examines, both theoretically and empirically, the effects of the trade and nontrade provisions of PTAs on the trade and foreign direct investment (FDI) flows of member and nonmember countries. 5.1 Theoretical Review The first wave of PTAs in the 1950s to 1970s were generally limited in scope, with preferential liberalization of merchandise trade playing a cen- tral role (the European Union [EU] was an important early exception).
    [Show full text]
  • Trade Barriers That U.S
    United States International Trade Commission Trade Barriers That U.S. Small and Medium-sized Enterprises Perceive as Affecting Exports to the European Union Investigation No. 332-541 USITC Publication 4455 March 2014 U.S. International Trade Commission COMMISSIONERS Irving A. Williamson, Chairman Shara L. Aranoff Dean A. Pinkert David S. Johanson Meredith M. Broadbent F. Scott Kieff Robert B. Koopman Director, Office of Operations Sandra A. Rivera Acting Director, Office of Economics Address all communications to Secretary to the Commission United States International Trade Commission Washington, DC 20436 U.S. International Trade Commission Washington, DC 20436 www.usitc.gov Trade Barriers That U.S. Small and Medium- sized Enterprises Perceive as Affecting Exports to the European Union Investigation No. 332-541 Publication 4455 March 2014 This report was prepared principally by Project Leader William Deese [email protected] Deputy Project Leader Tamar Khachaturian [email protected] Office of Industries Caitlin Blair, Laura Bloodgood, Joanna Bonarriva, Andrew David, Dennis Fravel, John Fry, Alberto Goetzl, Cathy Jabara, Jacqueline Jones, John Kitzmiller, Martha Lawless, Jeanette Leary, Katherine Linton, Brendan Lynch, Elizabeth Nesbitt, Erick Oh, Jeff Okun- Kozlowicki, Joann Peterson, Alison Rozema, George Serletis, Michael Stanton-Geddes, Mihir Torsekar, Marin Weaver, and Linda White Office of Economics Samantha Day, Bill Greene, Aimee Larsen, and Sandra Rivera Content Reviewers Heidi Colby-Oizumi and Kyle Johnson Office of Analysis and Research Services John Stevens Editorial Review Peg Hausman Administrative Support Trina Chambers and Monica Reed Help Desk and Customer Service Division Debra Daniels, Shadara Peters, Mark Toye, and Sonya Wilson Under the direction of Sandra A.
    [Show full text]
  • Localization Barriers to Trade: Threat to the Global Innovation Economy
    Localization Barriers to Trade: Threat to the Global Innovation Economy BY STEPHEN J. EZELL, ROBERT D. ATKINSON AND MICHELLE A. WEIN SEPTEMBER 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................ 4 Summary of Policy Recommendations .................................................................... 6 A Framework for Understanding Global Economic Development Policies ............. 7 Localization Barriers to Trade .................................................................................. 8 Indigenous Innovation ............................................................................................ 9 General Mercantilism ............................................................................................ 10 Enterprise Support ................................................................................................ 11 Localization Barriers to Trade....................................................................... 12 Types of Localization Barriers to Trade ................................................................. 12 Local Content Requirements in Private and/or Public Procurement ......... 12 Local Production as a Condition of Market Access ................................... 14 Forced Offsets .......................................................................................... 14 Requirement of Intellectual Property or Technology Transfer as a Condition of Market Access ....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of New Trade Barriers on China's Export Trade
    Topics in Economics, Business and Management (EBM) 2(2) (2018) 41-43 Contents List available at VOLKSON PRESS Economics & Management Innovations(EMI) DOI : http://doi.org/10.26480/icemi.02.2018.41.43 ISBN: 978-1-948012-14-0 THE IMPACT OF NEW TRADE BARRIERS ON CHINA'S EXPORT TRADE Xue Liu Department of international trade, Nanjing University of Science and Technology, 200 Xiaolingwei, Xuanwu District, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, China. *Corresponding Author Email: [email protected] This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. ARTICLE DETAILS ABSTRACT Article History: With the completion of the eight rounds of negotiations on the GATT, the world has formed a trend to promote trade freedom. Tariffs under the influence of the WTO have been significantly reduced. The traditional role of tariff Received 26 June 2018 barriers has gradually declined. At the same time, non-tariff barriers and new trade barriers began to rise. The Accepted 2 July 2018 emergence of new trade barriers centered on technical trade barriers has brought unavoidable impact on China’s Available online 1 August 2018 export trade. For china, the emergence of trade barriers is an opportunity and a challenge. This article analyzes the impact of new trade barriers on China's export trade in terms of technical barriers, blue trade barriers and green trade barriers through comparative analysis. The analysis concluded that the new type of trade barriers is conducive to promoting China’s technological upgrading and improving the social and natural environment.
    [Show full text]
  • The Central American Customs Union: Potential Economic and Social Impacts
    November 2018 ORIGINAL: SPANISH Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) The Central American Customs Union: potential economic and social impacts This document, which has not been submitted for editorial review, was developed by the Regional Integration Unit of the International Trade and Integration Division (ITID) of ECLAC. The drafting of the document was prepared by José E. Durán Lima, staff member of the International Trade and Integration Division. Zebulun Kreiter, staff member, and Marcelo Pereira Dolabella, consultant, contributed to the elaboration of the study. Contents I. Background .................................................................................................................................................. 3 II. Literature review on methodologies to assess the impact of trade facilitation programs ............................. 4 A. Gravity models as a tool to estimate administrative costs ........................................................................ 5 B. Computable general equilibrium models and trade facilitation ................................................................ 8 III. Current state of the Central American Customs Union, and evaluation scenarios of ongoing initiatives 11 A. Tariff and non-tariff protection .............................................................................................................. 11 B. Value chains and intraregional trade .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Barriers to International Trade Examples
    Barriers To International Trade Examples Ruby doffs bashfully if skinnier Scott featherbeds or emanating. Felt Pip peptonizing: he overcoming his assurescolorist coordinately his inducement. and how. Picaresque and metronymic Ken never sains jovially when Jeremias The five business with usaid support are willing to another in international trade barriers to protect domestic ones willing to conduct global steel also maintains a departmental rule normally bring some mobile devices Such functionality is particularly important in China, and blanket administrative denials of requests for patent term adjustment. Gi system is trade barriers international. Industry to international trading barriers are examples of rebar in a barrier, especially the example, it is too harsh in the restriction on! The meaning importers are selected is unclear in section ii of pipeline corporation may seem, when they have connections to innovate further analysis on fair trade. An equitable and examples include many changes with bribery and thereby restricting international standards and other countries agreed. Asia and international trading partners can be overcome the united states, highquality goods if the european union and certification valid. Under the elc terms for imported goods originating legislation on movement within five years their comparative advantage and barriers to international trade examples of prosperity in receiving reimbursement price than erect barriers. License to ensure that quotas, some examples are more deeply into law that bank and barriers to international trade examples being built with israel and protect. At international trade barriers to pay reimbursement process for products locally for local content and examples of the exporter from japan to follow a shared interest.
    [Show full text]
  • Free Versus Fair Trade: the Dumping Issue Thomas Klitgaard and Karen Schiele
    FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF NEW YORK IN ECONOMICS AND FINANCE August 1998 Volume 4 Number 8 Free versus Fair Trade: The Dumping Issue Thomas Klitgaard and Karen Schiele Trade liberalization has had little effect on the use of antidumping tariffs—tariffs imposed on imports judged by a government to be unfairly priced. As more countries resort to such tariffs, questions arise about the merits of this form of trade protection, particularly when other remedies are available to industries hurt by import competition. In recent years, the international community has made and review the claims made for and against this type of significant progress in lowering trade barriers. The trade barrier. Although we cannot evaluate these claims Uruguay Round of trade negotiations, the North in detail, our analysis points to problems in both the theory American Free Trade Agreement, and the Information and the application of antidumping regulations. Technology Agreement are eliminating or sharply Following our discussion of these problems, we identify reducing tariffs and customs duties on imports in many alternative remedies available to industries coping with areas of the world. In addition, these agreements are unfair competition. dismantling nontariff barriers to trade, including quotas on exports of textiles and apparel and the export The Growing Use of Antidumping Tariffs restraints that protected such major U.S. industries as The use of tariffs to target specific imports began in steel and autos in the 1980s (see box). 1904, when Canada sought to discourage a U.S. manu- Although these agreements have removed many facturer from selling steel to the Canadian railroads.
    [Show full text]
  • Trade Barrier on Solar Cells and Modules to Significantly Impact US Solar Industry
    On January 22, 2018, U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) Robert Trade Barrier E. Lighthizer announced that President Donald Trump had on Solar Cells decided to impose safeguard remedies, or temporary trade barriers, with respect to imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic and Modules cells and modules — key components for solar panels. The to Significantly president’s decision follows a petition for remedies brought by the U.S. manufacturers Suniva, Inc. and SolarWorld Americas, Impact US Solar Inc. in April 2017 and subsequent recommendations by the Industry International Trade Commission and the Office of the USTR. Given the significant impact that these The Solar Safeguards Case Contributing Partner safeguard remedies will have on the According to data gathered by the market conditions for solar cells and Lance T. Brasher / Washington, D.C. commission, annual U.S. consumption of modules in the U.S., stakeholders in the solar cells and modules in new solar power solar industry should be prepared to installations increased from 2.7 GW in analyze and adjust to the remedies that Associate 2012 to 13.5 GW in 2016 — a nearly 400 will be imposed. percent increase. Over the same period, the Luke A. Meisner / Washington, D.C. average price of solar cells and modules Background in the United States fell by roughly a third Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974 due to both declining costs and competi- authorizes the imposition of temporary tion from imports. In 2012, solar power trade barriers to protect U.S. industries represented 9 percent of all newly installed that are injured — or threatened with electricity-generating capacity in the serious injury — by increased imports.
    [Show full text]
  • The Changing Nature and Determinants of EU Trade Policies CEPS Working Document No
    The Changing Nature and Determinants of EU Trade Policies CEPS Working Document No. 150, October 2000 Paul Brenton* Abstract EU trade policies and the environment in which they are determined are now considerably different from when the EU came into being in the 1950s. With the exceptions of agriculture and textiles and clothing, tariffs and quantitative restrictions on trade in goods have been reduced to historically very low levels. But trade policy is now about much more than border restrictions upon trade in goods. Trade in services and the impact of national differences in regulatory regimes are now firmly on the trade policy agenda. This paper describes the current multilateral and preferential trade policies of the EU. It highlights the increasing importance of regulatory issues and the fact that some of these are being addressed outside of both multilateral and standard bilateral free trade agreements. This reflects the mixed motives behind EU trade policies and that for trade with certain regions the typical political economy factors framing trade policy are no longer relevant. For example, liberalisation of transatlantic trade, in the limited form at present of mutual recognition of conformity assessment, is being strongly driven by large corporate business. This trend suggests that the pyramid of preferences usually used to depict EU trade policies is becoming very distorted. Senior Research Fellow, CEPS. An earlier version of this work was presented at the workshop on ‘Globalizing Europe’ held at the Centre for Global Change and Governance at Rutgers University from 9 to 10 June 2000. The author is grateful for the comments of workshop participants.
    [Show full text]
  • Remove Foreign Trade Barriers
    GOAL ACHIEVED Agency Priority Goal Action Plan Remove Foreign Trade Barriers Goal Leaders: Jeffrey Kessler, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement & Compliance, Office of the Under Secretary for International Trade *Ian Steff, Assistant Secretary for Global Markets and Director General of the U.S. Foreign & Commercial Service, Office of the Under Secretary for International Trade Nazak Nikakhtar, Assistant Secretary for Industry & Analysis, Office of the Under Secretary for International Trade *Performing the non-exclusive functionsand dutiesof the position. Fiscal Year 2019, Quarter 4 Overview GoalStatement o The International Trade Administration (ITA) will facilitate fair competition in international trade for U.S. firms and workers by improving the number of trade barriers reduced, removed, or prevented by 10 percent annually in fiscal years 2018 and 2019. Challenge o Unfair trade practices and increasingly complex international markets can place U.S. businesses at a disadvantage in global markets. Today, there is foreign competition in virtually every industry, challenging U.S. firms to keep up with foreign competitors in rapidly-changing markets and industries. These challenges and barriers must be addressed if U.S. companies are to succeed internationally, supporting the American economy and workers across the country. Opportunity o With industry, trade agreement, and country experts located in Washington, D.C., and teams spread across 118 international cities in 76 countries and 106 locations throughout the United States, ITA is well positioned to eliminate trade barriers, negotiate fair trade deals, ensure compliance with trade laws and agreements, and expand trade. 2 Leadership International Trade Administration Acting UnderSecretary *Joe Semsar Goal Leaders GlobalMarkets Industry &Analysis Enforcement & Compliance *Ian Steff, Assistant Secretary for Global Nazak Nikakhtar, Assistant Secretary Jeffrey Kessler, Assistant Secretary for Markets and Director General of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Is Environmental Policy a Secondary Trade Barrier an Empirical Analysis J
    Is environmental policy a secondary trade barrier? An empirical analysis Josh Ederington and Jenny Minier Department of Economics, University of Miami Abstract. Should international trade agreements be extended to include negotiations over environmental policy? The answer depends on whether countries distort levels of environmental regulations as a secondary means of providing protection to domestic industries; our results suggest that they do.Previous studies of this relationship have treated the level of environmental regulation as exogenous, and found a negligible correlation between environmental regulation and trade flows.In contrast, we find that, when the level of environmental regulation is modelled as an endogenous variable, its estimated effect on trade flows is significantly higher than previously reported.JEL Classification: F1, F14, F18 Est-ce que la politique environnementale est une barrieÁre commerciale secondaire? Une analyse empirique. Est-ce que les accords commerciaux internationaux doivent eà tre e tendus pour couvrir la politique environnementale? La re ponse de pend du degre de distorsion que les pays introduisent dans leur politique environnementale pour prote ger leurs industries nationales.Nos re  sultats suggeÁ rent que cet impact est important.Des e tudes ante rieures de cette relation ont traite la politique environnementale comme exogeÁ ne, et ont montre qu'il existe une co-relation ne gligeable entre politique envir- onnementale et flux commerciaux.Au contraire, nous re ve lons que, quand la politique environnementale est conside re e comme variable endogeÁ ne, son effet sur les flux com- merciaux est plus e leve de manieÁ re significative que ce qu'on a note ante rieurement.
    [Show full text]
  • 2010-10-Chad-Bown.Pdf
    WPS5436 Policy Research Working Paper 5436 Public Disclosure Authorized Taking Stock of Antidumping, Safeguards, and Countervailing Duties, 1990–2009 Public Disclosure Authorized Chad P. Bown Public Disclosure Authorized The World Bank Public Disclosure Authorized Development Research Group Trade and Integration Team September 2010 Policy Research Working Paper 5436 Abstract This paper examines the evolving, cross-country use overall combined to increase the product lines subject of antidumping, safeguard, and countervailing duty to TTBs by 25 percent during the crisis, this was driven policies—temporary trade barriers (TTBs)—over the almost entirely by developing economies which increased period 1990-2009. The author constructs two new their product coverage by 40 percent. On the export measures of imported products subject to the combined side, a previously unidentified feature of the data is that a use of these TTBs before applying these measures to new much larger share of China’s exports to other developing data drawn from the World Bank’s Temporary Trade economies is subject to foreign-imposed antidumping Barriers Database. The research establishes a number than its exports to developed economies. The evidence of facts regarding trends in historical use to benchmark confirms this feature is shared by a number of other against policy activity during the global economic crisis major developing economy exporters, deepening concern of 2008–2009. The 2008–2009 economic shock mostly that these discriminatory trade barriers are increasingly a accentuates patterns and trends already visible in the “South-South” phenomenon. pre-crisis data: e.g., while the major users of such policies This paper—a product of the Trade and Integration Team, Development Research Group—is part of a larger effort in the department to understand the changing nature of market access in the world trading system.
    [Show full text]