Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

A Test of Trade Theories when Expenditure is Home Biased

Contents:

Author Info

  • Brülhart, Marius
  • Trionfetti, Federico

Abstract

We develop a criterion to distinguish two dominant paradigms of international trade theory: constant-returns perfectly competitive models, and increasing-returns monopolistically competitive models. Our analysis makes use of the pervasive presence of home-biased expenditure. It predicts that countries’ relative output and their relative home biases are positively correlated in increasing-returns sectors (the ‘home-bias effect’), while no such relationship exists in constant-returns sectors. This discriminating criterion turns out to be robust to a number of generalizations of the baseline model. Our empirical results suggest that the increasing-returns model fits particularly well for the mechanical and electrical engineering industries, which account for close to half of manufacturing output.

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://www.cepr.org/pubs/dps/DP5097.asp
Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers in its series CEPR Discussion Papers with number 5097.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: Jun 2005
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:5097

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Centre for Economic Policy Research, 77 Bastwick Street, London EC1V 3PZ.
Phone: 44 - 20 - 7183 8801
Fax: 44 - 20 - 7183 8820

Order Information:
Email:

Related research

Keywords: border effects; home-market effects; international specialization; new trade theory;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

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. Thierry Mayer & Keith Head, 2003. "The Empirics of Agglomeration and Trade," Working Papers 2003-15, CEPII research center.
  2. Davis, D.R. & Weinstein, D.E., 1997. "Does Economic Geography Matter for International Specialization?," Papers 591, Harvard - Institute for International Development.
  3. Brülhart, Marius & Trionfetti, Federico, 2009. "A test of trade theories when expenditure is home biased," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(7), pages 830-845, October.
  4. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2000. "Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to the Border Puzzle," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 485, Boston College Department of Economics.
  5. Combes, Pierre-Philippe & Lafourcade, Miren & Mayer, Thierry, 2005. "The trade-creating effects of business and social networks: evidence from France," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 1-29, May.
  6. Edward E. Leamer & James Levinsohn, 1994. "International Trade Theory: The Evidence," NBER Working Papers 4940, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  7. Miyagiwa, Kaz, 1991. "Oligopoly and Discriminatory Government Procurement Policy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1320-28, December.
  8. Laussel, Didier & Paul, Thierry, 2007. "Trade and the location of industries: Some new results," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 148-166, March.
  9. Thierry Mayer & Keith Head, 2002. "Illusory Border Effects: Distance Mismeasurement Inflates Estimates of Home Bias in Trade," Working Papers 2002-01, CEPII research center.
  10. Simon J. Evenett & Wolfgang Keller, 2002. "On Theories Explaining the Success of the Gravity Equation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(2), pages 281-316, April.
  11. Donald R. Davis, 1997. "The home market, trade, and industrial structure," Staff Reports 35, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
  12. James E. Anderson & Douglas Marcouiller, 2002. "Insecurity And The Pattern Of Trade: An Empirical Investigation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(2), pages 342-352, May.
  13. Davis, Donald R. & Weinstein, David E., 1999. "Economic geography and regional production structure: An empirical investigation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 379-407, February.
  14. Alan V. Deardorff, 1995. "Determinants of Bilateral Trade: Does Gravity Work in a Neoclassical World?," NBER Working Papers 5377, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  15. Hummels, David & Levinsohn, James, 1995. "Monopolistic Competition and International Trade: Reconsidering the Evidence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 110(3), pages 799-836, August.
  16. Jacques J. Polak, 1996. "Is APEC a Natural Regional Trading Bloc? A Critique of the ‘Gravity Model’of International Trade," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(5), pages 533-543, 09.
  17. 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.
  18. Donald R. Davis & David E. Weinstein, 1998. "An Account of Global Factor Trade," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1849, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
  19. Keith Head & Thierry Mayer & John Ries, 2000. "On the Pervasiveness of Home Market Effects," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 0862, Econometric Society.
  20. John F. Helliwell, 1995. "Do National Borders Matter for Quebec's Trade?," NBER Working Papers 5215, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  21. Trefler, Daniel, 1995. "The Case of the Missing Trade and Other Mysteries," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1029-46, December.
  22. Crozet, Matthieu & Trionfetti, Federico, 2008. "Trade costs and the Home Market Effect," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 309-321, December.
  23. Diego Puga, 1996. "The rise and fall of regional inequalities," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 20643, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  24. Keith E. Maskus, 1991. "Comparing International Trade Data and Product and National Characteristics Data for the Analysis of Trade Models," NBER Chapters, in: International Economic Transactions: Issues in Measurement and Empirical Research, pages 17-60 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  25. Jeffrey Sachs & Andrew Warner, 1995. "Economic Reform and the Progress of Global Integration," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1733, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
  26. Gordon H. Hanson & Chong Xiang, 2004. "The Home-Market Effect and Bilateral Trade Patterns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 1108-1129, September.
  27. Kristian Behrens & Andrea R. Lamorgese & Gianmarco I.P. Ottaviano & Takatoshi Tabuchi, 2005. "Testing the 'home market effect' in a multi-country world: A theory-based approach," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 561, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
  28. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/10191 is not listed on IDEAS
  29. Marius BRÜLHART & Federico TRIONFETTI, 2000. "Public Expenditure and International Specialisation," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'Econométrie et d'Economie politique (DEEP) 00.23, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, DEEP.
  30. Jonathan Eaton & Samuel Kortum, 2002. "Technology, Geography, and Trade," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(5), pages 1741-1779, September.
  31. Keith Head & Thierry Mayer, 2000. "Non-Europe: The magnitude and causes of market fragmentation in the EU," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, vol. 136(2), pages 284-314, June.
  32. Chen, Natalie, 2002. "Intra-national versus International Trade in the European Union: Why do National Borders Matter?," CEPR Discussion Papers 3407, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  33. Winters, L. Alan, 1984. "Separability and the specification of foreign trade functions," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(3-4), pages 239-263, November.
  34. Davis, Donald R., 1995. "Intra-industry trade: A Heckscher-Ohlin-Ricardo approach," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3-4), pages 201-226, November.
  35. Krugman, Paul, 1980. "Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the Pattern of Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 950-59, December.
  36. 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.
  37. Behrens, Kristian & Lamorgese, Andrea & Ottaviano, Gianmarco Ireo Paolo & Tabuchi, Takatoshi, 2004. "Testing the Home Market Effect in a Multi-Country World: The Theory," CEPR Discussion Papers 4468, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  38. Rolf Weder, 2003. "Comparative home-market advantage: An empirical analysis of British and American exports," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, vol. 139(2), pages 220-247, June.
  39. Bergstrand, Jeffrey H, 1990. "The Heckscher-Ohlin-Samuelson Model, the Linder Hypothesis and the Determinants of Bilateral Intra-industry Trade," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(403), pages 1216-29, December.
  40. John F. Helliwell, 1997. "National Borders, Trade and Migration," NBER Working Papers 6027, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  41. Baldwin, Robert E., 1984. "Trade policies in developed countries," Handbook of International Economics, in: R. W. Jones & P. B. Kenen (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 12, pages 571-619 Elsevier.
  42. Shang-Jin Wei, 1996. "Intra-National versus International Trade: How Stubborn are Nations in Global Integration?," NBER Working Papers 5531, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  43. Donald R. Davis & David E. Weinstein, 1998. "Market Access, Economic Geography, and Comparative Advantage: An Empirical Assessment," NBER Working Papers 6787, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  44. Pagan, Adrian, 1984. "Econometric Issues in the Analysis of Regressions with Generated Regressors," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 25(1), pages 221-47, February.
  45. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/c8dmi8nm4pdjkuc9g8o4o0m0g is not listed on IDEAS
  46. Carolyn L. Evans, 2001. "Home bias in trade: location or foreign-ness?," Staff Reports 128, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
  47. Nicita, Alessandro & Olarreaga, Marcelo, 2001. "Trade and production, 1976-99," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2701, The World Bank.
  48. Rauch, James E., 1999. "Networks versus markets in international trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 7-35, June.
  49. Brulhart, Marius & Trionfetti, Federico, 2004. "Public expenditure, international specialisation and agglomeration," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 851-881, August.
  50. Keith Head & John Ries, 2001. "Increasing Returns versus National Product Differentiation as an Explanation for the Pattern of U.S.-Canada Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 858-876, September.
  51. Russell Hillberry & David Hummels, 2002. "Explaining Home Bias in Consumption: The Role of Intermediate Input Trade," NBER Working Papers 9020, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  52. Davis, Donald R. & Weinstein, David E., 2003. "Market access, economic geography and comparative advantage: an empirical test," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 1-23, January.
  53. Carolyn L. Evans, 2003. "The Economic Significance of National Border Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(4), pages 1291-1312, September.
  54. McCallum, John, 1995. "National Borders Matter: Canada-U.S. Regional Trade Patterns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(3), pages 615-23, June.
  55. Helpman, Elhanan, 1987. "Imperfect competition and international trade: Evidence from fourteen industrial countries," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 62-81, March.
  56. Federico Trionfetti, 2001. "Using home-biased demand to test trade theories," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, vol. 137(3), pages 404-426, September.
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:
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page.

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:cpr:ceprdp:5097. 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: ().

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.