IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ier/iecrev/v49y2008i4p1365-1394.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

National Treatment At The Wto: The Roles Of Product And Country Heterogeneity

Author

Listed:
  • Kamal Saggi
  • Nese Sara

Abstract

This paper analyzes the World Trade Organization's (WTO's) national treatment (NT) clause in a two-country model where quality of goods and/or market size are heterogenous across countries. When market size is symmetric across countries, a reciprocal NT agreement (i) benefits the high-quality country, (ii) hurts the low-quality country, and (iii) delivers higher aggregate world welfare. However, such an agreement can arise in equilibrium if the high-quality country's market is relatively bigger and the quality gap between goods is small (i.e., goods are sufficiently "alike"). The qualitative nature of these results does not change when quality is endogenously determined. Copyright © (2008) by the Economics Department of the University of Pennsylvania and the Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association.

Suggested Citation

  • Kamal Saggi & Nese Sara, 2008. "National Treatment At The Wto: The Roles Of Product And Country Heterogeneity," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 49(4), pages 1365-1394, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:ier:iecrev:v:49:y:2008:i:4:p:1365-1394
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Horn, Henrik, 2009. "The Burden of Proof in National Treatment Disputes and the Environment," Working Paper Series 791, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    2. Horn, Henrik, 2011. "The burden of proof in trade disputes and the environment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 15-29, July.
    3. Difei Geng & Kamal Saggi, 2018. "Is there a case for non-discrimination in the international protection of intellectual property?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Kamal Saggi (ed.), Economic Analysis of the Rules and Regulations of the World Trade Organization, chapter 5, pages 109-123, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Russell Hillberry & Phillip McCalman, 2016. "Import dynamics and demands for protection," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 49(3), pages 1125-1152, August.
    5. Vladimir A. Karamychev & Jean-Marie Viaene, 2021. "M-Payments, Financial Inclusion, and Full Market Coverage," CESifo Working Paper Series 8995, CESifo.
    6. Doi, Naoshi & Ohashi, Hiroshi, 2017. "Empirical analysis of the national treatment obligation under the WTO: The case of Japanese shochu," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 43-52.
    7. Emanuele Bacchiega & Antonio Minniti & Arsen Palestini, 2016. "Quality, distance and trade: A strategic approach," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 95, pages 165-191, March.
    8. Ferrara, Ida & Missios, Paul & Yildiz, Halis Murat, 2019. "Product quality, consumption externalities, and the role of National Treatment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 1-35.
    9. Bacchiega, Emanuele & Randon, Emanuela & Zirulia, Lorenzo, 2012. "Strategic accessibility competition," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 195-212.
    10. Spearot, Alan C., 2013. "Variable demand elasticities and tariff liberalization," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 26-41.
    11. Yang, Deli & Sonmez, Mahmut (Maho), 2018. "Global norm of national treatment for patent uncertainties: A longitudinal comparison between the US and China," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 164-176.
    12. Maggi, Giovanni, 2014. "International Trade Agreements," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 317-390, Elsevier.
    13. Paul Missios & Ida Ferrara & Halis Murat Yildiz, 2015. "Consumption Externalities, Product Quality, and the Role of National Treatment," Working Papers 048, Ryerson University, Department of Economics.
    14. Difei Geng & Kamal Saggi, 2013. "The case for non-discrimination in the international protection of intellectual property," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 13-00017, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
    15. José L. Moraga‐González & Jean‐Marie Viaene, 2015. "Antidumping, Intra‐Industry Trade, And Quality Reversals," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 56(3), pages 777-803, August.
    16. Ederington,Josh & Ruta,Michele, 2016. "Non-tariff measures and the world trading system," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7661, The World Bank.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations

    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:ier:iecrev:v:49:y:2008:i:4:p:1365-1394. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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-Blackwell Digital Licensing or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deupaus.html .

    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.