Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Estimating price elasticities of food trade functions: How relevant is the gravity approach?

Contents:

Author Info

  • Femenia, Fabienne
  • Gohin, Alexandre

Abstract

The main objective of the paper is related to the long standing issue of the econometric estimation of price elasticity of food trade functions. We investigate the relevance of the prominent gravity approach. This approach is based on the assumptions of symmetric, monotone, homothetic, CES preferences. We test all these assumptions using European intra trade of cheese. In a general way, all assumptions made on preferences by the gravity approach are not supported by our data set. The bias induced on the estimated price elasticities is not univocal.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/7211
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by TRADEAG - Agricultural Trade Agreements in its series Working Papers with number 7211.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 2007
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ags:tragwp:7211

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://tradeag.vitamib.com/

Related research

Keywords: Elasticities; Trade; Generalized Maximum Entropy; Censored demand system; International Relations/Trade;

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. William A. Barnett & Meenakshi Pasupathy, 2001. "Regularity Of The Generalized Quadratic Production Model: A Counterexample," Econometrics 0112001, EconWPA.
  2. Deardorff, A.V., 1995. "Determinants of Bilateral Trade : Does Gravity Work in a Neoclassical World?," Papers 95-05, Michigan - Center for Research on Economic & Social Theory.
  3. Elhanan Helpman, 1999. "The Structure of Foreign Trade," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 13(2), pages 121-144, Spring.
  4. Ito, Shoichi & Chen, Dean T. & Peterson, E. Wesley F., 1990. "Modeling international trade flows and market shares for agricultural commodities: a modified Armington procedure for rice," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 4(3-4), pages 315-333, December.
  5. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2004. "Trade Costs," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 593, Boston College Department of Economics.
  6. repec:att:wimass:9713 is not listed on IDEAS
  7. Blum, Bernardo S. & Goldfarb, Avi, 2006. "Does the internet defy the law of gravity?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 384-405, December.
  8. David L. Ryan & Terence J. Wales, 1999. "Flexible And Semiflexible Consumer Demands With Quadratic Engel Curves," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(2), pages 277-287, May.
  9. Hendrik Wolff & Thomas Heckelei & Ron C. Mittelhammer, 2004. "Imposing Curvature and Monotonicity on Flexible Functional Forms: An Efficient Regional Approach," Econometric Society 2004 North American Summer Meetings 450, Econometric Society.
  10. George Judge & Marco Van_Akkeren, 2000. "Generalized Moment Based Estimation and Inference," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 0073, Econometric Society.
  11. A. Ronald Gallant & Gene H. Golub, 1982. "Imposing Curvature Restrictions on Flexible Functional Forms," Discussion Papers 538, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
  12. Deaton, Angus S & Muellbauer, John, 1980. "An Almost Ideal Demand System," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 312-26, June.
  13. Robert C. Feenstra & James R. Markusen & Andrew K. Rose, 2001. "Using the gravity equation to differentiate among alternative theories of trade," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 34(2), pages 430-447, May.
  14. Vitor Trindade & Muhammed Dalgin & Devashish Mitra, 2006. "Inequality, Nonhomothetic Preferences, And Trade: A Gravity Approach," Working Papers 0606, Department of Economics, University of Missouri, revised 08 May 2006.
  15. Segerson, Kathleen & Mount, Timothy D, 1985. "A Non-homothetic Two-Stage Decision Model Using AIDS," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 67(4), pages 630-39, November.
  16. Karp, Larry S. & Perloff, Jeffrey M., 2002. "A synthesis of agricultural trade economics," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 37, pages 1945-1998 Elsevier.
  17. Seale, James L., Jr. & Regmi, Anita & Bernstein, Jason, 2003. "International Evidence On Food Consumption Patterns," Technical Bulletins 33580, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
  18. Simon J. Evenett & Wolfgang Keller, 1996. "On Theories Explaining the Success of the Gravity Equation," International Trade 9608001, EconWPA, revised 13 Jun 1997.
  19. Heien, Dale & Wessells, Cathy Roheim, 1990. "Demand Systems Estimation with Microdata: A Censored Regression Approach," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 8(3), pages 365-71, July.
  20. Markusen, James R, 1986. "Explaining the Volume of Trade: An Eclectic Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 1002-11, December.
  21. Yves Surry & Nadine Herrard, 2002. "Modelling trade in processed food products: an econometric investigation for France," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 29(1), pages 1-28, March.
  22. Neary, J.P & Roberts, K.W.S, 1978. "The Theory of Household Behaviour under Rationing," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 132, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
  23. Dow, James & Werlang, Sérgio Ribeiro da Costa, 1991. "Homothetic Preferences," Economics Working Papers (Ensaios Economicos da EPGE) 176, FGV/EPGE Escola Brasileira de Economia e Finanças, Getulio Vargas Foundation (Brazil).
  24. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2003. "Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to the Border Puzzle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 170-192, March.
  25. Moschini, GianCarlo, 1999. "Imposing Local Curvature Conditions in Flexible Demand System," Staff General Research Papers 1745, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  26. Miller, Douglas J. & Paarlberg, Philip L., 2001. "An Alternative Approach To Determining The Elasticity Of Excess Demand Facing The United States," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20587, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
  27. Barnett, William A., 2002. "Tastes and technology: curvature is not sufficient for regularity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 199-202, May.
  28. Anderson, James E, 1979. "A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 106-16, March.
  29. Golan, Amos & Judge, George G. & Miller, Douglas, 1996. "Maximum Entropy Econometrics," Staff General Research Papers 1488, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  30. Russel J. Cooper & Keith R. McLaren, 1992. "An Empirically Oriented Demand System with Improved Regularity Properties," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 25(3), pages 652-68, August.
  31. Jon Haveman & David Hummels, 2004. "Alternative hypotheses and the volume of trade: the gravity equation and the extent of specialization," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 37(1), pages 199-218, February.
  32. Channing Arndt & Songquan Liu & Paul Preckel, 1999. "On dual approaches to demand systems estimation in the presence of binding quantity constraints," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(8), pages 999-1008.
  33. Cranfield, J. A. L. & Preckel, Paul V. & Eales, James S. & Hertel, Thomas W., 2002. "Estimating consumer demands across the development spectrum: maximum likelihood estimates of an implicit direct additivity model," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 289-307, August.
  34. Diewert, W. E. & Wales, T. J., 1988. "A normalized quadratic semiflexible functional form," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 327-342, March.
  35. Bowen, Harry P & Leamer, Edward E & Sveikauskas, Leo, 1987. "Multicountry, Multifactor Tests of the Factor Abundance Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(5), pages 791-809, December.
  36. Lee, Lung-Fei & Pitt, Mark M, 1986. "Microeconometric Demand Systems with Binding Nonnegativity Constraints: The Dual Approach," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(5), pages 1237-42, September.
  37. Edward Balistreri & Russell Hillberry, 2006. "Trade frictions and welfare in the gravity model: how much of the iceberg melts?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 39(1), pages 247-265, February.
  38. Golan, Amos & Judge, George & Perloff, Jeffrey, 1997. "Estimation and inference with censored and ordered multinomial response data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 23-51, July.
  39. Diansheng Dong & Brian W. Gould & Harry M. Kaiser, 2004. "Food Demand in Mexico: An Application of the Amemiya-Tobin Approach to the Estimation of a Censored Food System," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(4), pages 1094-1107.
  40. Hunter, Linda, 1991. "The contribution of nonhomothetic preferences to trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3-4), pages 345-358, May.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Alexandre Gohin, 2008. "La sélection des produits agricoles sensibles : le cas européen," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 87(2), pages 49-76.
  2. Olper, Alessandro & Raimondi, Valentina, 2002. "Elasticity of trade flow to trade barriers: A comparison among emerging estimation techniques," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44119, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
  3. Houssein Guimbard & David Laborde Debucquet & Cristina Mitaritonna, 2009. "A Picture of Tariff Protection Across the World in 2004 MAcMap-HS6, Version 2," Working Papers 2009-22, CEPII research center.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:tragwp:7211. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.