IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea11/103391.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Preference erosion and the developing countries exports to the EU: a dynamic panel gravity approach

Author

Listed:
  • Raimondi, Valentina
  • Scoppola, Margherita
  • Olper, Alessandro

Abstract

Since 2004 there has been a sharp decrease in border protection for the EU rice industry. Because the EU grants trade preferences to a considerable number of rice exporting developing countries, the reform implied preference erosion as well. By addressing the impact of preference erosion on developing countries rice exports to the EU, this paper contributes two original insights to the literature: first, by proposing a new empirical approach to compute the preference margin when tariff rate quotas are in force which is based on the assumption of the existence of fixed costs and economies of scale in international trade; second, by estimating the trade elasticities of preferences by means of a dynamic panel gravity equation to deal with the issues of endogeneity of preferences and persistency in bilateral trade flows. The results show that the way preference margins are calculated matters significantly when assessing the existence and extent of their erosion and the values of trade elasticities. Finally, the estimations highlight the fact that the impact of preferences is still very strong for some of the countries concerned.

Suggested Citation

  • Raimondi, Valentina & Scoppola, Margherita & Olper, Alessandro, 2011. "Preference erosion and the developing countries exports to the EU: a dynamic panel gravity approach," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 103391, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea11:103391
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.103391
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/103391/files/Preference%20erosion%20AAEA%202011.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.103391?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Neil Foster & Robert Stehrer, 2011. "Preferential trade agreements and the structure of international trade," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 147(3), pages 385-409, September.
    2. Baldwin, Richard & Taglioni, Daria, 2006. "Gravity for Dummies and Dummies for Gravity Equations," CEPR Discussion Papers 5850, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Hansen, Lars Peter, 1982. "Large Sample Properties of Generalized Method of Moments Estimators," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(4), pages 1029-1054, July.
    4. Joseph Francois & Bernard Hoekman & Miriam Manchin, 2006. "Preference Erosion and Multilateral Trade Liberalization," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 20(2), pages 197-216.
    5. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2004. "Trade Costs," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(3), pages 691-751, September.
    6. Mary Amiti & John Romalis, 2007. "Will the Doha Round Lead to Preference Erosion?," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 54(2), pages 338-384, June.
    7. Denis Medvedev, 2010. "Preferential trade agreements and their role in world trade," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 146(2), pages 199-222, June.
    8. Marc J. Melitz, 2003. "The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(6), pages 1695-1725, November.
    9. Jose‐Maria Garcia‐Alvarez‐Coque & Victor Martinez‐Gomez & Miquel Villanueva, 2010. "Seasonal protection of F&V imports in the EU: impacts of the entry price system," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(2), pages 205-218, March.
    10. Martin, Will & Pham, Cong S., 2008. "Estimating the gravity model when zero trade flows are frequent," Working Papers eco_2008_03, Deakin University, Department of Economics.
    11. Avinash Dixit, 1989. "Hysteresis, Import Penetration, and Exchange Rate Pass-Through," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 104(2), pages 205-228.
    12. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    13. 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.
    14. Elhanan Helpman & Marc Melitz & Yona Rubinstein, 2008. "Estimating Trade Flows: Trading Partners and Trading Volumes," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 123(2), pages 441-487.
    15. Candau, Fabien & Jean, Sebastien, 2005. "What Are EU Trade Preferences Worth for Sub-Saharan Africa and Other Developing Countries?," Working Papers 18863, TRADEAG - Agricultural Trade Agreements.
    16. Jan Jørgensen & Philipp Schröder, 2007. "Effects of Tariffication: Tariffs and Quotas under Monopolistic Competition," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 479-498, September.
    17. Maria Cipollina & Luca Salvatici, 2010. "The trade impact of European Union agricultural preferences," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 87-106.
    18. Mark Coppejans & Donna Gilleskie & Holger Sieg & Koleman Strumpf, 2007. "Consumer Demand under Price Uncertainty: Empirical Evidence from the Market for Cigarettes," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(3), pages 510-521, August.
    19. Bernard Hoekman & Will Martin & Carlos A. Primo Braga, 2009. "Trade Preference Erosion : Measurement and Policy Response," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 9437, December.
    20. Magee Christopher S, 2003. "Endogenous Preferential Trade Agreements: An Empirical Analysis," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 1-19, December.
    21. Magee, Christopher S.P., 2008. "New measures of trade creation and trade diversion," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 349-362, July.
    22. Boumellassa, Houssein & Debucquet, David Laborde & Mitaritonna, Cristina, 2009. "A picture of tariff protection across the World in 2004: MAcMap-HS6, Version 2," IFPRI discussion papers 903, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    23. David Roodman, 2009. "A Note on the Theme of Too Many Instruments," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 71(1), pages 135-158, February.
    24. Semykina, Anastasia & Wooldridge, Jeffrey M., 2010. "Estimating panel data models in the presence of endogeneity and selection," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 157(2), pages 375-380, August.
    25. 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.
    26. Costas Arkolakis, 2010. "Market Penetration Costs and the New Consumers Margin in International Trade," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(6), pages 1151-1199.
    27. Manuel Arellano & Stephen Bond, 1991. "Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 58(2), pages 277-297.
    28. De Benedictis Luca & Vicarelli Claudio, 2005. "Trade Potentials in Gravity Panel Data Models," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-33, September.
    29. Ekaterini Kyriazidou, 2001. "Estimation of Dynamic Panel Data Sample Selection Models," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 68(3), pages 543-572.
    30. Martínez-Zarzoso, Inmaculada & Felicitas, Nowak-Lehmann D. & Horsewood, Nicholas, 2009. "Are regional trading agreements beneficial?: Static and dynamic panel gravity models," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 46-65, March.
    31. David Greenaway & Richard Kneller, 2007. "Industry Differences in the Effect of Export Market Entry: Learning by Exporting?," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 143(3), pages 416-432, 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. Carl Gaigné & Lota-D Tamini, 2018. "Environmental regulation and eco-industry trade: Theory and evidence from the European Union," Working Papers hal-01941269, HAL.
    2. Margherita Scoppola & Valentina Raimondi & Alessandro Olper, 2018. "The impact of EU trade preferences on the extensive and intensive margins of agricultural and food products," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(2), pages 251-263, March.
    3. Abdessalem Abassi & Lota Dabio Tamini, 2016. "Trade performance and potential of North African countries: An application of a stochastic frontier gravity model," Cahiers de recherche CREATE 2016-4, CREATE.
    4. Sorgho, Zakaria, 2015. "RTAs' Proliferation and Trade-Diversion Effects: Evidence of the "Spaghetti Bowl" Phenomenon," Working Papers 206223, University of Laval, Center for Research on the Economics of the Environment, Agri-food, Transports and Energy (CREATE).
    5. Lota D. Tamini & Maurice Doyon & Rodrigue Simon, 2016. "Analyzing Trade Liberalization Effects in the Egg Sector Using a Dynamic Gravity Model," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 64(2), pages 383-411, June.
    6. Lota D. Tamini & Zakaria Sorgho, 2018. "Trade in Environmental Goods: Evidences from an Analysis Using Elasticities of Trade Costs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 70(1), pages 53-75, May.
    7. Carl Gaigné & Lota D. Tamini, 2021. "Environmental Taxation and Import Demand for Environmental Goods: Theory and Evidence from the European Union," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 78(2), pages 307-352, February.
    8. Sorgho, Zakaria, 2014. "RTAs’ Proliferation and Trade-diversion effects: Evidence of the “Spaghetti Bowl” Phenomenon," MPRA Paper 60503, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Zakaria Sorgho, 2016. "RTAs' Proliferation and Trade-diversion Effects: Evidence of the ‘Spaghetti Bowl’ Phenomenon," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 285-300, February.
    10. Thomas Kopp & Sören Prehn & Bernhard Brümmer, 2016. "Preference Erosion – The Case of Everything But Arms and Sugar," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(9), pages 1339-1359, September.
    11. Lota Dabio Tamini & Sorgho Zakaria, 2016. "Trade in environmental goods: how important are trade costs elasticities?," Cahiers de recherche CREATE 2016-3, CREATE.
    12. Beyhan Bektasoglu & Tanja Engelbert & Martina Brockmeier, 2017. "The Effect of Aggregation Bias: An NTB-modelling Analysis of Turkey's Agro-food Trade with the EU," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(10), pages 2255-2276, October.

    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. Valentina Raimondi & Margherita Scoppola & Alessandro Olper, 2012. "The Impact of European Union Preferential Policies in the Rice Industry: A Dynamic Panel Gravity Approach," FOODSECURE Working papers 4, LEI Wageningen UR.
    2. 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.
    3. Maria Cipollina & David Laborde Debucquet & Luca Salvatici, 2017. "The tide that does not raise all boats: an assessment of EU preferential trade policies," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 153(1), pages 199-231, February.
    4. Moelders, Florian, 2011. "Trade Persistence and the Limits of Trade Agreements," Proceedings of the German Development Economics Conference, Berlin 2011 58, Verein für Socialpolitik, Research Committee Development Economics.
    5. Bo Xiong & Sixia Chen, 2014. "Estimating gravity equation models in the presence of sample selection and heteroscedasticity," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(24), pages 2993-3003, August.
    6. Güzin Bayar, 2018. "Estimating export equations: a survey of the literature," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 54(2), pages 629-672, March.
    7. Cipollina, Maria & Laborde, David & Salvatici, Luca, 2013. "Do Preferential Trade Policies (Actually) Increase Exports? An analysis of EU trade policies," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150177, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. Maria Cipollina & Luca De Benedictis & Luca Salvatici & Claudio Vicarelli, 2016. "Policy Measurement And Multilateral Resistance In Gravity Models," Working Papers LuissLab 16130, Dipartimento di Economia e Finanza, LUISS Guido Carli.
    9. 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.
    10. Tamini, Lota D. & Chebbi, Houssem Eddine & Abbassi, Abdessalem, 2016. "Trade performance and potential of North African countries: An application of a stochastic frontier gravity model," AGRODEP working papers 33, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    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. Martin Clever & Inmaculada Martínez-Zarzoso, 2010. "Deeper Integration: What Effects On Trade," Ibero America Institute for Econ. Research (IAI) Discussion Papers 204, Ibero-America Institute for Economic Research.
    13. Inmaculada Martínez-Zarzoso, 2013. "The log of gravity revisited," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(3), pages 311-327, January.
    14. Hayakawa, Kazunobu & Yoshimi, Taiyo, 2016. "Gravity with multiple tariff schemes," IDE Discussion Papers 614, Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization(JETRO).
    15. Frederik Stender, 2018. "MERCOSUR in gravity: an accounting approach to analyzing its trade effects," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 501-522, April.
    16. Zongo, Amara, 2021. "The impact of services trade restrictiveness on food trade," International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 71-94.
    17. Cheong, Juyoung & Kwak, Do Won & Tang, Kam Ki, 2015. "Heterogeneous Effects of Preferential Trade Agreements: How does Partner Similarity Matter?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 222-236.
    18. Scott L. Baier & Amanda Kerr & Yoto V. Yotov, 2018. "Gravity, distance, and international trade," Chapters, in: Bruce A. Blonigen & Wesley W. Wilson (ed.), Handbook of International Trade and Transportation, chapter 2, pages 15-78, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Estrella Gómez-Herrera, 2013. "Comparing alternative methods to estimate gravity models of bilateral trade," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 1087-1111, June.
    20. Lota D. Tamini & Zakaria Sorgho, 2018. "Trade in Environmental Goods: Evidences from an Analysis Using Elasticities of Trade Costs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 70(1), pages 53-75, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agricultural and Food Policy; International Relations/Trade;

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • Q17 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agriculture in International Trade
    • F14 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Empirical Studies of Trade

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:aaea11:103391. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.