IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/japwor/v49y2019icp32-39.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Did the least developed countries benefit from duty-free quota-free access to the Japanese market?

Author

Listed:
  • Ito, Tadashi
  • Aoyagi, Takahide

Abstract

Through the WTO’s Doha round initiatives, countries classified as least developed countries (LDCs) were granted duty-free quota-free (DFQF) access to the Japanese market. This study examines the impact of that access and finds that, in general, it benefited the LDCs. The construction of concordance tables for Japan's 9-digit tariff line codes over 19 years enables analyses at the tariff line level, which overcomes a possible aggregation bias. The exogenous nature of DFQF access mitigates the endogeneity problem. The triple difference estimator shows that in general the LDCs benefited from DFQF access to the Japanese market. Tariff lines which were granted zero tariffs and substantial preference margins over other countries resulted in successful imports into the Japanese market.

Suggested Citation

  • Ito, Tadashi & Aoyagi, Takahide, 2019. "Did the least developed countries benefit from duty-free quota-free access to the Japanese market?," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 32-39.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:japwor:v:49:y:2019:i:c:p:32-39
    DOI: 10.1016/j.japwor.2018.09.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0922142518300379
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.japwor.2018.09.002?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Garth Frazer & Johannes Van Biesebroeck, 2010. "Trade Growth under the African Growth and Opportunity Act," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(1), pages 128-144, February.
    2. Justin Pierce & Peter Schott, 2009. "Concording U.S. Harmonized System Categories Over Time," Working Papers 09-11, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    3. Bernard Hoekman & Francis Ng & Marcelo Olarreaga, 2002. "Eliminating Excessive Tariffs on Exports of Least Developed Countries," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 16(1), pages 1-21, June.
    4. Egger, Hartmut & Egger, Peter & Greenaway, David, 2008. "The trade structure effects of endogenous regional trade agreements," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 278-298, March.
    5. Low, Patrick & Piermartini, Roberta & Richtering, Jurgen, 2006. "Non-reciprocal preference erosion arising from MFN liberalitzation in agriculture: What are the risks?," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2006-02, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    6. de Melo, Jaime & Carrère, Céline, 2009. "The Doha Round and Market Access for LDCs: Scenarios for the EU and US Markets," CEPR Discussion Papers 7313, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. 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.
    8. Aiello, Francesco & Demaria, Federica, 2009. "Do trade preferential agreements enhance the exports of developing countries? Evidence from the EU GSP," MPRA Paper 20093, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Baier, Scott L. & Bergstrand, Jeffrey H., 2007. "Do free trade agreements actually increase members' international trade?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 72-95, March.
    10. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kiyoyasu Tanaka, 2022. "The European Union's withdrawal of trade preferences for Cambodia," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(11), pages 3398-3419, November.
    2. Hayakawa, Kazunobu & Ito, Tadashi & Urata, Shujiro, 2021. "Impacts of increased Chinese imports on Japan’s labor market," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    3. Flora Bellone & Cilem Selin Hazir & Toshiyuki Matsuura, 2020. "Adjusting to China competition: Evidence from Japanese plant-product-level data," Working Papers hal-03086387, HAL.
    4. Khorana, Sangeeta & Caram, Santiago & Biagetti, Marco, 2021. "Developmental relevance of Everything but Arms: Implications for Bangladesh after LDC graduation," MPRA Paper 116258, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2022. "Effect of the utilization of non-reciprocal trade preferences offered by the QUAD countries on beneficiary countries' economic complexity," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    6. MATSUURA Toshiyuki, 2019. "Heterogeneous Impact of Import Competition on Firm Organization: Evidence from Japanese firm-level data," Discussion papers 19086, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    7. Kazunobu Hayakawa & Kenta Yamanouchi, 2024. "How does the reform of rules of origin affect firm performance in importing countries?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(2), pages 837-856, February.
    8. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2021. "Do Unilateral Trade Preferences Help Reduce Poverty in Beneficiary Countries?," EconStor Preprints 247346, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    9. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm & Iyer, Harish, 2021. "Effect of Aid for Trade and Foreign Direct Investment Inflows on the Utilization of Unilateral Trade Preferences offered by the QUAD countries," EconStor Preprints 238211, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    10. Youngmin BAEK & HAYAKAWA Kazunobu & TSUBOTA Kenmei & URATA Shujiro & YAMANOUCHI Kenta, 2019. "Tariff Pass-through in Wholesaling: Evidence from Firm-level Data in Japan," Discussion papers 19064, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    11. Baek, Youngmin & Hayakawa, Kazunobu & Tsubota, Kenmei & Urata, Shujiro & Yamanouchi, Kenta, 2021. "Tariff Pass-through in Wholesaling: Evidence from Firm-level Data in Japan✰," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    12. Aoyagi, Takahide & Ito, Tadashi & Matsuura, Toshiyuki, 2022. "Welfare gains through globalization: Evidence from Japan's manufacturing sector," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    13. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2021. "Effect of the Utilization of Non-Reciprocal Trade Preferences offered by the QUAD on Economic Growth in Beneficiary Countries," EconStor Preprints 242848, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.

    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. Ito, Tadashi, 2013. "Did the least developed countries benefit from duty-free quota-free access to the Japanese market?," IDE Discussion Papers 434, Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization(JETRO).
    2. Gnutzmann-Mkrtchyan, Arevik & Volmer, Maximilian, 2022. "EU trade policy reform: towards reciprocal concessions with developing countries," Hannover Economic Papers (HEP) dp-697, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    3. Emiliano Magrini & Pierluigi Montalbano & Silvia Nenci, 2013. "Are the EU trade preferences really effective? A Generalized Propensity Score evaluation of the Southern Mediterranean Countries' case in agriculture and fishery," Working Papers 2/13, Sapienza University of Rome, DISS.
    4. Emanuel Ornelas & Marcos Ritel, 2020. "The not‐so‐generalised effects of the Generalized System of Preferences," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(7), pages 1809-1840, July.
    5. Kazunobu Hayakawa & Kenta Yamanouchi, 2024. "How does the reform of rules of origin affect firm performance in importing countries?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(2), pages 837-856, February.
    6. Sèna Kimm Gnangnon, 2023. "Do unilateral trade preferences help reduce poverty in beneficiary countries?," International Journal of Economic Policy Studies, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 249-288, February.
    7. Kazunobu Hayakawa, 2023. "Multiple preference regimes and rules of origin," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 159(3), pages 673-696, August.
    8. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm & Iyer, Harish, 2021. "Effect of Aid for Trade and Foreign Direct Investment Inflows on the Utilization of Unilateral Trade Preferences offered by the QUAD countries," EconStor Preprints 238211, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    9. Xavier Cirera & Francesca Foliano & Michael Gasiorek, 2016. "The impact of preferences on developing countries’ exports to the European Union: bilateral gravity modelling at the product level," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 59-102, February.
    10. Maria Cipollina & Luca Salvatici, 2022. "The Dark Matter of Bilateral Preferential Margins: An Assessment of the Effect of US Tariffs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-16, April.
    11. Khorana, Sangeeta & Caram, Santiago & Biagetti, Marco, 2021. "Developmental relevance of Everything but Arms: Implications for Bangladesh after LDC graduation," MPRA Paper 116258, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Facundo Albornoz & Emanuel Ornelas & Irene Brambilla, 2020. "The Impact of Tariff Hikes on Firm Exports," Asociación Argentina de Economía Política: Working Papers 4316, Asociación Argentina de Economía Política.
    13. 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.
    14. Di Ubaldo, Mattia & Borchert, Ingo, 2020. "Go ahead and trade: The effect of uncertainty removal in the EU’s GSP scheme," Papers WP691, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    15. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2021. "Do Unilateral Trade Preferences Help Reduce Poverty in Beneficiary Countries?," EconStor Preprints 247346, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    16. Fernandes, Ana M. & Forero, Alejandro & Maemir, Hibret & Mattoo, Aaditya, 2023. "Are trade preferences a Panacea? The export impact of the African growth and Opportunity Act," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    17. 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.
    18. Yoke Fong Kong & Richard Kneller, 2016. "Measuring the Impact of China's Export Growth on its Asian Neighbours," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 195-220, February.
    19. Gil-Pareja, Salvador & Llorca-Vivero, Rafael, 2017. "El comercio exterior de España y el proceso de Integración Europea /The Foreign trade of Spain and the European Integration Process," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 35, pages 63-84, Enero.
    20. Sytsma, Tobias, 2019. "Rules of Origin Liberalization with Multi-Product Firms: Theory and Evidence from Bangladeshi Apparel Exporters," MPRA Paper 95956, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    LDCs; Japan; Tariff liberalisation; Duty-free quota-free access; WTO Doha Round;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F14 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Empirical Studies of Trade

    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:eee:japwor:v:49:y:2019:i:c:p:32-39. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505557 .

    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.