IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/applec/v56y2024i8p941-955.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cultural distance, language dissimilarity and trade disputes

Author

Listed:
  • Jianqiang Sun
  • Fahmida Mostafiz
  • Yumei Cai
  • Fujing Yang

Abstract

In this paper, we investigate the role of cultural distance in international trade disputes by using a hand-collected dataset of 535 World Trade Organization trade dispute cases covering 158 countries. We find that cultural distance significantly increases the probability of trade disputes and the willingness of a country to initiate a trade complaint. Country pairs with an additional unit of cultural distance measured directly by the Hofstede culture indices have an average 0.18% higher probability of being involved in a trade dispute. Country with a unit farther cultural distance to its trade partner has an average 0.18% higher probability of filing a trade complaint. We further measure cultural distance indirectly from the perspective of language dissimilarity and find that country pairs using a common official language other than their spoken or native language have an average 0.55% higher probability of trade disputes. Cultural costs and cultural protectionism the possible mechanisms are analysed in a general pattern. This study provides a cultural perspective for trade conflict resolution.

Suggested Citation

  • Jianqiang Sun & Fahmida Mostafiz & Yumei Cai & Fujing Yang, 2024. "Cultural distance, language dissimilarity and trade disputes," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(8), pages 941-955, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:56:y:2024:i:8:p:941-955
    DOI: 10.1080/00036846.2023.2174932
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00036846.2023.2174932
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00036846.2023.2174932?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.

    More about this item

    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:taf:applec:v:56:y:2024:i:8:p:941-955. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEC20 .

    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.