IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/canjec/v53y2020i3p1132-1161.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

GSP expiration and declining exports from developing countries

Author

Listed:
  • Shushanik Hakobyan

Abstract

This paper investigates whether the 2011 expiration of the most comprehensive trade preference program (Generalized System of Preferences or GSP) offered by the US had a detrimental impact on the exports from developing countries. The effect of GSP expiration is examined with a triple difference‐in‐differences estimation that controls for both country‐ and product‐level export changes. Even though the duties collected during the period of expiration are ultimately refunded after GSP is reauthorized, the findings of this paper suggest that the expiration of GSP had a considerable impact on the level of exports to the US. On average exports dropped by 3% in 2011, with exports of agricultural products and textiles and clothing declining as much as 5% and 9%, respectively. The decline is increasing in the tariff rates and rates of utilization. The effect appears to be persistent over time as exports do not fully recover by 2012. The 2011 expiration is also found to be similar in magnitude to the 1995–1996 and 2013–2015 expirations, the longest episodes of expiration in the history of the GSP. Résumé. Suspension du SGP et baisse des exportations en provenance des pays en voie de développement. Cet article cherche à déterminer si la suspension en 2011 du Système Généralisé de Préférences (SGP) proposé par les États‐Unis eut des conséquences négatives sur les exportations en provenance des pays en voie de développement. Nous étudions l’effet de la suspension du SGP grâce à une estimation basée sur la méthode des triples différences tenant compte des changements en matière d’exportation, à la fois au niveau des produits mais aussi des pays. Même si les droits perçus au cours de la période d’interruption du SGP furent finalement restitués au moment de sa réintroduction, les conclusions de cet article suggèrent que la suspension du SGP engendra des répercussions considérables quant au niveau des exportations vers les États‐Unis. En moyenne, les exportations chutèrent de 3% en 2011; les exportations de produits agricoles et les exportations de textiles et de vêtements chutèrent quant à elles de 5% et 9% respectivement. Cette baisse entraîna une hausse des droits de douane et des taux d’utilisation. Ces effets semblent persister dans le temps puisque les exportations en 2012 ne retrouvèrent pas totalement les niveaux antérieurs. Il apparaît que la suspension du SGP en 2011 fut de même ampleur que les interruptions de 1995–1996 et de 2013–2015, les plus longues de l’histoire du SGP.

Suggested Citation

  • Shushanik Hakobyan, 2020. "GSP expiration and declining exports from developing countries," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(3), pages 1132-1161, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:canjec:v:53:y:2020:i:3:p:1132-1161
    DOI: 10.1111/caje.12454
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/caje.12454
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/caje.12454?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shushanik Hakobyan, 2017. "Export Competitiveness of Developing Countries and US Trade Policy," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(7), pages 1405-1429, July.
    2. 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.
    3. Kyle Handley & Nuno Limão, 2018. "Policy Uncertainty, Trade, and Welfare: Theory and Evidence for China and the United States," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Policy Externalities and International Trade Agreements, chapter 5, pages 123-175, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Kara Reynolds, 2009. "The biggest losers (and winners) from US trade liberalization," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(3), pages 421-442.
    5. Shushanik Hakobyan, 2015. "Accounting for underutilization of trade preference programs: The US generalized system of preferences," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(2), pages 408-436, May.
    6. Joseph Francois & Bernard Hoekman & Miriam Manchin, 2006. "Preference Erosion and Multilateral Trade Liberalization," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 20(2), pages 197-216.
    7. Kyle Handley & Nuno Limão, 2018. "Trade and Investment under Policy Uncertainty: Theory and Firm Evidence," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Policy Externalities and International Trade Agreements, chapter 4, pages 89-122, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Handley, Kyle, 2014. "Exporting under trade policy uncertainty: Theory and evidence," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(1), pages 50-66.
    9. 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.
    10. Emily Blanchard & Shushanik Hakobyan, 2015. "The US Generalised System of Preferences in Principle and Practice," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 399-424, March.
    11. Shushanik Hakobyan, 2015. "Accounting for underutilization of trade preference programs: The US generalized system of preferences," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 48(2), pages 408-436, May.
    12. James Devault, 1996. "Competitive Need Limits And The U.S. Generalized System Of Preference," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 14(4), pages 58-66, October.
    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2021. "WTO membership, the membership duration and the utilization of non-reciprocal trade preferences offered by the QUAD Countries," EconStor Preprints 247265, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    5. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2021. "Do Unilateral Trade Preferences Help Reduce Poverty in Beneficiary Countries?," EconStor Preprints 247346, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    6. 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).
    7. Lourenço S. Paz & Magnus Reis & André Filipe Zago Azevedo, 2024. "New Evidence on WTO Membership After the Uruguay Round: An Analysis at the Sectoral Level," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 1-39, February.
    8. Besedes, Tibor & Kohl, Tristan & Lake, James, 2020. "Phase out tariffs, phase in trade?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    9. Bekkers, Eddy & Cariola, Gianmarco, 2022. "The impact of LDC graduation on trade: A quantitative assessment," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2022-5, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    10. Facundo Albornoz & Irene Brambilla & Emanuel Ornelas, 2021. "Firm export responses to tariff hikes," CEP Discussion Papers dp1783, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    11. 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.
    12. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2023. "Effects of the Utilization of Non-Reciprocal Trade Preferences Offered by QUAD Countries on Economic Growth in Beneficiary Countries," KDI Journal of Economic Policy, Korea Development Institute (KDI), vol. 45(1), pages 33-68.
    13. 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).
    14. Tobias Sytsma, 2021. "Rules of origin and trade preference utilization among least developed countries," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 39(4), pages 701-718, October.
    15. Fabien Forge & Jason Garred & Kyae Lim Kwon, 2021. "When are Tariff Cuts Not Enough? Heterogeneous Effects of Trade Preferences for the Least Developed Countries," Working Papers 2106E, University of Ottawa, Department of Economics.
    16. Hinnerk Gnutzmann & Arevik Gnutzmann‐Mkrtchyan, 2022. "The impact of trade preferences removal: Evidence from the Belarus Generalized System of Preferences withdrawal," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(9), pages 2977-3000, September.
    17. 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.
    18. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2022. "Effect of the Duty-Free Quota-Free Market access Schemes in favour of Least developed countries' Products on the Volatility of the Utilization Rate of these Schemes," EconStor Preprints 260567, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    19. 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.

    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. Emanuel Ornelas, 2016. "Special and Differential Treatment for Developing Countries," CESifo Working Paper Series 5823, CESifo.
    2. 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.
    3. Tobias Sytsma, 2021. "Rules of origin and trade preference utilization among least developed countries," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 39(4), pages 701-718, October.
    4. Anupa Sharma & Jason Grant & Kathryn Boys, 2021. "Truly Preferential Treatment? Reconsidering the Generalised System of (Trade) Preferences with Competing Suppliers," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(2), pages 500-524, June.
    5. Bown,Chad P. & Crowley,Meredith A & Bown,Chad P. & Crowley,Meredith A, 2016. "The empirical landscape of trade policy," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7620, The World Bank.
    6. 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.
    7. Shushanik Hakobyan, 2017. "Export Competitiveness of Developing Countries and US Trade Policy," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(7), pages 1405-1429, July.
    8. Hayakawa, Kazunobu & Yoshimi, Taiyo, 2016. "Gravity with multiple tariff schemes," IDE Discussion Papers 614, Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization(JETRO).
    9. Atika Benaddi & Peri Silva, 2021. "Trade policy uncertainty: Evidence from the Arab League countries," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(5), pages 1327-1357, November.
    10. Celik, Levent & Karabay, Bilgehan & McLaren, John, 2020. "Fast-track authority: A hold-up interpretation," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    11. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2021. "WTO membership, the membership duration and the utilization of non-reciprocal trade preferences offered by the QUAD Countries," EconStor Preprints 247265, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    12. 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).
    13. Yiping Sun & Xiangyi Li & Tengyuan Zhang & Jiawei Fu, 2022. "Does Trade Policy Uncertainty Exacerbate Environmental Pollution?—Evidence from Chinese Cities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-21, February.
    14. Haoyuan Ding & Bo Pu & Tong Qi & Kai Wang, 2022. "Valuation effects of the US–China trade war: The effects of foreign managers and foreign exposure," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3), pages 662-683, July.
    15. Kazunobu Hayakawa & Fukunari Kimura & Nuttawut Laksanapanyakul, 2018. "Measuring the usage of preferential tariffs in the world," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 154(4), pages 705-723, November.
    16. Cole, Matthew T. & Lake, James & Zissimos, Ben, 2021. "Contesting an international trade agreement," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    17. HAYAKAWA Kazunobu & JINJI Naoto & MATSUURA Toshiyuki & YOSHIMI Taiyo, 2019. "Costs of Utilizing Regional Trade Agreements," Discussion papers 19054, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    18. 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.
    19. Lin Sun & Kexuan Zhou & Linhui Yu, 2020. "Does the reduction of regional trade policy uncertainty increase Chinese enterprises' outward foreign direct investment? Evidence from the China−ASEAN Free Trade Area," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 127-144, May.
    20. Zhou, Kexuan & Kumar, Sanjay & Yu, Linhui & Jiang, Xinlin, 2021. "The economic policy uncertainty and the choice of entry mode of outward foreign direct investment: Cross-border M&A or Greenfield Investment," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).

    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:wly:canjec:v:53:y:2020:i:3:p:1132-1161. 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: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5982 .

    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.