IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/reviec/v19y2011i4p763-775.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Dark Side of the Generalized System of Preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Bernhard Herz
  • Marco Wagner

Abstract

The Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) was established to promote the exports of low-income countries to industrialized countries in order to support their economic growth and development. However, the design of these schemes is rather complex and the effects of GSP have been found to be controversial. While previous studies solely analyzed preferential agreements of individual granting countries separately, implying a one-sided perspective, we take a general view and investigate the overall and dynamic effects common to the various GSP schemes in order to provide generalized recommendations for economic policy. In our empirical analysis, based on an extensive dataset covering most of world trade, we find that GSP tends to foster developing countries' exports in the short-run, but hampers them in the long-run. Also, GSP granting countries are able to promote their own exports initially, while in the long-run their exports decrease. Economically advanced GSP recipients 1 are more likely to benefit from GSP than less advanced countries. Taken together, GSP does not seem to be a suitable instrument to promote sustainable economic growth and development of low-income countries.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Bernhard Herz & Marco Wagner, 2011. "The Dark Side of the Generalized System of Preferences," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(4), pages 763-775, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:reviec:v:19:y:2011:i:4:p:763-775
    DOI: j.1467-9396.2011.00980.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1467-9396.2011.00980.x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/j.1467-9396.2011.00980.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bernhard Herz & Marco Wagner, 2007. "Do the World Trade Organization and the Generalized System of Preferences foster bilateral trade?," Working Papers 020, Bavarian Graduate Program in Economics (BGPE).
    2. André Sapir & Lars Lundberg, 1984. "The U.S. Generalized System of Preferences and Its Impacts," NBER Chapters, in: The Structure and Evolution of Recent US Trade Policy, pages 195-236, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Boriss Siliverstovs & Dieter Schumacher, 2009. "Estimating gravity equations: to log or not to log?," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 645-669, June.
    4. Richard Baldwin & Daria Taglioni, 2006. "Gravity for Dummies and Dummies for Gravity Equations," NBER Working Papers 12516, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Martínez-Zarzoso, Inmaculada & Nowak-Lehmann D., Felicitas & Vollmer, Sebastian, 2007. "The log of gravity revisited," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 64, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    6. Daniel Lederman & Çaglar Özden, 2007. "Geopolitical Interests And Preferential Access To U.S. Markets," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(2), pages 235-258, July.
    7. Yves Bourdet & Joakim Gullstrand & Karin Olofsdotter (ed.), 2007. "The European Union and Developing Countries," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3731.
    8. Subramanian, Arvind & Wei, Shang-Jin, 2007. "The WTO promotes trade, strongly but unevenly," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 151-175, May.
    9. Mr. Hans P Lankes & Miss Katerina Alexandraki, 2004. "The Impact of Preference Erosionon Middle-Income Developing Countries," IMF Working Papers 2004/169, International Monetary Fund.
    10. Rainer Winkelmann, 2008. "Econometric Analysis of Count Data," Springer Books, Springer, edition 0, number 978-3-540-78389-3, November.
    11. Jeffrey A. Frankel, 1998. "The Regionalization of the World Economy," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number fran98-1, March.
    12. Aaditya Mattoo & Devesh Roy & Arvind Subramanian, 2003. "The Africa Growth and Opportunity Act and its Rules of Origin: Generosity Undermined?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(6), pages 829-851, June.
    13. Grossman, Gene M, 1982. "Import Competition from Developed and Developing Countries," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 64(2), pages 271-281, May.
    14. Grossman, Gene M. & Sykes, Alan O., 2005. "A preference for development: the law and economics of GSP," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(1), pages 41-67, March.
    15. Persson, Maria & Wilhelmsson, Fredrik, 2006. "Assessing the Effects of EU Trade Preferences for Developing Countries," Working Papers 2006:4, Lund University, Department of Economics, revised 26 Jun 2006.
    16. Peter Egger, 2002. "An Econometric View on the Estimation of Gravity Models and the Calculation of Trade Potentials," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 297-312, February.
    17. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2003. "Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to the Border Puzzle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 170-192, March.
    18. Daniel J. Henderson & Daniel L. Millimet, 2008. "Is gravity linear?," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(2), pages 137-172.
    19. Debapriya Bhattacharya & Mustafizur Rahman, 2000. "Regional Cumulation Facility Under Ec-Gsp:Strategic Response From Short And Medium Term Perspectives," CPD Working Paper 9, Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD).
    20. Ozden, Caglar & Reinhardt, Eric, 2005. "The perversity of preferences: GSP and developing country trade policies, 1976-2000," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 1-21, October.
    21. Bergstrand, Jeffrey H, 1985. "The Gravity Equation in International Trade: Some Microeconomic Foundations and Empirical Evidence," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 67(3), pages 474-481, August.
    22. Olivier Cadot & Antoni Estevadeordal & Akiko Suwa-Eisenmann & Thierry Verdier, 2006. "The Origin of Goods: Rules of Origin in Regional Trade Agreements," Post-Print halshs-00754856, HAL.
    23. Michael Tomz & Judith L. Goldstein & Douglas Rivers, 2007. "Do We Really Know That the WTO Increases Trade? Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(5), pages 2005-2018, December.
    24. Langhammer, Rolf J., 1983. "Ten years of the EEC's generalized system of preferences for developing countries: success or failure?," Kiel Working Papers 183, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    25. Brown, Drusilla K, 1989. "Trade and Welfare Effects of the European Schemes of the Generalized System of Preferences," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 37(4), pages 757-777, July.
    26. J. M. C. Santos Silva & Silvana Tenreyro, 2006. "The Log of Gravity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(4), pages 641-658, November.
    27. Lars Nilsson, 2002. "Trading relations: is the roadmap from Lometo Cotonou correct?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(4), pages 439-452.
    28. Whalley, John, 1990. "Non-discriminatory Discrimination: Special and Differential Treatment under the GATT for Developing Countries," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(403), pages 1318-1328, December.
    29. World Bank, 2007. "World Development Indicators 2007," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 8150, December.
    30. Joakim Westerlund & Fredrik Wilhelmsson, 2009. "Estimating the gravity model without gravity using panel data," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(6), pages 641-649.
    31. Dowlah Caf, 2008. "The Generalized System of Preferences of the United States: Does It Promote Industrialization and Economic Growth in Least Developed Countries?," The Law and Development Review, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 74-97, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Herz Bernhard & Wagner Marco, 2011. "Regionalism as a Building Block for Multilateralism," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-25, March.
    2. Bernhard Herz & Marco Wagner, 2010. "Multilateralism versus Regionalism!?," Working Papers 089, Bavarian Graduate Program in Economics (BGPE).
    3. Estrella Gómez-Herrera, 2013. "Comparing alternative methods to estimate gravity models of bilateral trade," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 1087-1111, June.
    4. Tamaş Anca, 2020. "Why should the gravity model be taught in business education?," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 14(1), pages 422-433, July.
    5. Gil-Pareja, Salvador & Llorca-Vivero, Rafael & Martínez-Serrano, José Antonio, 2014. "Do nonreciprocal preferential trade agreements increase beneficiaries' exports?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 291-304.
    6. Cooke, Edgar F. A., 2012. "Is the impact of AGOA heterogeneous?," MPRA Paper 43277, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Stephan Klasen & Inmaculada Martínez-Zarzoso & Felicitas Nowak-Lehmann & Matthias Bruckner, 2021. "Does the designation of least developed country status promote exports?," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(2), pages 157-177, February.
    8. Salvador Gil-Pareja & Rafael Llorca-Vivero & José Antonio Martínez-Serrano, 2016. "A Re-Examination of the Effect of GATT/WTO on Trade," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 561-584, July.
    9. Marco Dueñas & Giorgio Fagiolo, 2013. "Modeling the International-Trade Network: a gravity approach," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 8(1), pages 155-178, April.
    10. Emanuel Ornelas, 2016. "Special and Differential Treatment for Developing Countries," CESifo Working Paper Series 5823, CESifo.
    11. Florian Mölders & Ulrich Volz, 2011. "Trade creation and the status of FTAs: empirical evidence from East Asia," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 147(3), pages 429-456, September.
    12. Salvador Gil-Pareja, 2011. "Do nonreciprocal preference regimes increase exports?," ERSA conference papers ersa11p1561, European Regional Science Association.
    13. Michele Fratianni & Francesco Marchionne, 2011. "The Limits to Integration," Chapters, in: Miroslav N. Jovanović (ed.), International Handbook on the Economics of Integration, Volume I, chapter 9, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Salvador Gil-Pareja & Rafael Llorca-Vivero & José Antonio Martínez-Serrano, 2018. "Reciprocal vs nonreciprocal trade agreements: which have been best to promote exports?," Working Papers 1802, Department of Applied Economics II, Universidad de Valencia.
    15. Marie M Stack & Rob Ackrill & Martin Bliss, 2019. "Sugar trade and the role of historical colonial linkages," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(1), pages 79-108.
    16. Nuria Gallego & Carlos Llano, 2014. "The Border Effect and the Nonlinear Relationship between Trade and Distance," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 1016-1048, November.
    17. Cipollina, Maria & Salvatici, Luca, 2007. "EU and developing countries: an analysis of preferential margins on agricultural trade flows," Working Papers 7219, TRADEAG - Agricultural Trade Agreements.
    18. Valeria Costantini & Francesco Crespi, 2015. "European enlargement policy, technological capabilities and sectoral export dynamics," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 25-69, February.
    19. Valeria Costantini & Francesco Crespi, 2013. "Public policies for a sustainable energy sector: regulation, diversity and fostering of innovation," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 401-429, April.
    20. Claudio Candia Campano & Medardo Aguirre González & Lilliam Antón López & Javier Beltrán Valdebenito, 2018. "A gravity model of trade for Nicaraguan agricultural exports," Revista Cuadernos de Economia, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, FCE, CID, vol. 37(74), pages 391-428, July.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C13 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Estimation: General
    • C23 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Models with Panel Data; Spatio-temporal Models
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F55 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - International Institutional Arrangements

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:reviec:v:19:y:2011:i:4:p:763-775. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0965-7576 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.