IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eps/cepswp/5528.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is the EU internal market suffering from an integration deficit?

Author

Listed:
  • Pacchioli, Consuelo

Abstract

As an alternative to measuring the extent of market integration, �home-bias� indicates the degree to which economic agents �over-prefer� to transact with domestic agents rather than agents from other EU countries. Such an exclusive preference is measured against a benchmark of (ideal) market integration and is called �home-bias�. This CEPS Working Document by former CEPS Researcher Consuelo Pacchioli addresses the estimation of a �normal trade� gravity equation to establish the possible existence of home-bias effects in the US market and the EU internal market, which are the two most integrated regions in the world. Estimations based on pooled OLS cross-section analysis, with the novelty of the inclusion of time dummies in order to obtain unique indexes and panel data-fixed effects, both reject the hypothesis of no internal barrier to trade. This shows a tendency to �over-trade� within borders both in the US and the EU. Taking the finding for the US market as a benchmark, a direct comparison with the EU internal market is considered: the estimated results show that an average EU country still trades more within its borders than with other member states � about three to four times as much as a random US state does. A number of explanations are offered for this relatively low level of EU internal market integration.

Suggested Citation

  • Pacchioli, Consuelo, 2011. "Is the EU internal market suffering from an integration deficit?," CEPS Papers 5528, Centre for European Policy Studies.
    • Handle: RePEc:eps:cepswp:5528
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ceps.eu/system/files/book/2011/05/WD_348_Consuelo_on_Internal_Market_final.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Volker Nitsch, 2000. "National borders and international trade: evidence from the European Union," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 33(4), pages 1091-1105, November.
    2. Tamim Bayoumi & Barry Eichengreen, 1997. "Is Regionalism Simply a Diversion? Evidence from the Evolution of the EC and EFTA," NBER Chapters, in: Regionalism versus Multilateral Trade Arrangements, pages 141-168, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. 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.
    4. Bergstrand, Jeffrey H, 1985. "The Gravity Equation in International Trade: Some Microeconomic Foundations and Empirical Evidence," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 67(3), pages 474-481, August.
    5. Jacques Pelkmans, 2008. "Economic Approaches of the Internal Market," Bruges European Economic Research Papers 13, European Economic Studies Department, College of Europe.
    6. Aitken, Norman D, 1973. "The Effect of the EEC and EFTA on European Trade: A Temporal Cross-Section Analysis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 63(5), pages 881-892, December.
    7. Alan V. Deardorff, 2011. "Determinants of Bilateral Trade: Does Gravity Work in a Neoclassical World?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Robert M Stern (ed.), Comparative Advantage, Growth, And The Gains From Trade And Globalization A Festschrift in Honor of Alan V Deardorff, chapter 24, pages 267-293, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Russell Hillberry & David Hummels, 2003. "Intranational Home Bias: Some Explanations," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(4), pages 1089-1092, November.
    9. Unknown, 2007. "Indicators June-07," Amber Waves:The Economics of Food, Farming, Natural Resources, and Rural America, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, pages 1-3, June.
    10. Keith Head & Thierry Mayer, 2000. "Non-Europe: The magnitude and causes of market fragmentation in the EU," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 136(2), pages 284-314, June.
    11. Holger C. Wolf, 1997. "Patterns of Intra- and Inter-State Trade," NBER Working Papers 5939, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Unknown, 2007. "Indicators February-07," Amber Waves:The Economics of Food, Farming, Natural Resources, and Rural America, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, pages 1-3, February.
    13. Unknown, 2007. "Indicators April-07," Amber Waves:The Economics of Food, Farming, Natural Resources, and Rural America, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, pages 1-3, April.
    14. 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.
    15. World Bank, 2007. "World Development Indicators 2007," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 8150, December.
    16. Holger C. Wolf, 2000. "Intranational Home Bias In Trade," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 82(4), pages 555-563, November.
    17. Unknown, 2007. "Indicators September-07," Amber Waves:The Economics of Food, Farming, Natural Resources, and Rural America, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, pages 1-3, September.
    18. Chen, Natalie, 2004. "Intra-national versus international trade in the European Union: why do national borders matter?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 93-118, May.
    19. John F. Helliwell, 1996. "Do National Borders Matter for Quebec's Trade?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 29(3), pages 507-522, August.
    20. McCallum, John, 1995. "National Borders Matter: Canada-U.S. Regional Trade Patterns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(3), pages 615-623, June.
    21. Juan Delgado, 2006. "Single market trails home bias," Policy Briefs 38, Bruegel.
    22. Narcissa Balta & Juan Delgado, 2009. "Home Bias and Market Integration in the EU," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 55(1), pages 110-144, March.
    23. Unknown, 2007. "Indicators November-07," Amber Waves:The Economics of Food, Farming, Natural Resources, and Rural America, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, pages 1-3, November.
    24. Anderson, James E, 1979. "A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 106-116, March.
    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. Gomez-Herrera, Estrella & Martens, Bertin & Turlea, Geomina, 2014. "The drivers and impediments for cross-border e-commerce in the EU," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 83-96.
    2. Bo Cowgill & Cosmina Dorobantu & Bertin Martens, 2013. "Does online trade live up to the promise of a borderless world? Evidence from the EU Digital Single Market," JRC Working Papers on Digital Economy 2013-08, Joint Research Centre.

    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. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2004. "Trade Costs," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(3), pages 691-751, September.
    2. Ghazalian, Pascal L. & Furtan, W. Hartley, 2008. "The effects of multinational activities on the measurement of home bias," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 401-416, September.
    3. Matthias Helble, 2007. "Border Effect Estimates for France and Germany Combining International Trade and Intranational Transport Flows," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 143(3), pages 433-463, October.
    4. Valeriano Martínez-San Román & Marta Bengoa & Blanca Sánchez-Robles, 2016. "Foreign direct investment, trade integration and the home bias: evidence from the European Union," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 197-229, February.
    5. Chen, Natalie, 2004. "Intra-national versus international trade in the European Union: why do national borders matter?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 93-118, May.
    6. Daniel L. Millimet & Thomas Osang, 2007. "Do state borders matter for U.S. intranational trade? The role of history and internal migration," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(1), pages 93-126, February.
    7. Salas-Olmedo, María Henar & García, Patricia & Gutiérrez, Javier, 2015. "Accessibility and transport infrastructure improvement assessment: The role of borders and multilateral resistance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 110-129.
    8. Mark Vancauteren & Daniel Weiserbs, 2011. "Intra-European Trade of Manufacturing Goods: An Extension of the Gravity Model," International Econometric Review (IER), Econometric Research Association, vol. 3(1), pages 1-24, April.
    9. Nuria Gallego & Carlos Llano, 2014. "The Border Effect and the Nonlinear Relationship between Trade and Distance," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 1016-1048, November.
    10. Salvador Gil-Pareja & Rafael Llorca & Josè A. Martinez-Serrano, 2011. "Is There A Continental Bias In Trade?," ERSA conference papers ersa10p792, European Regional Science Association.
    11. Valeriano Martínez-San Román & Marta Bengoa-Calvo & Blanca Sánchez-Robles Rute, 2013. "The Trade-FDI Nexus: Evidence from the European Union," Working Papers 2013/15, Economics Department, Universitat Jaume I, Castellón (Spain).
    12. Lionel Fontagné & Michaël Pajot & Jean-Michel Pasteels, 2002. "Potentiels de commerce entre économies hétérogènes : un petit mode d'emploi des modèles de gravité," Economie & Prévision, La Documentation Française, vol. 0(1), pages 115-139.
    13. Wrona, Jens, 2015. "Border Effects without Borders," VfS Annual Conference 2015 (Muenster): Economic Development - Theory and Policy 113060, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    14. Magerman, Glenn & Studnicka, Zuzanna & Van Hove, Jan, 2016. "Distance and border effects in international trade: A comparison of estimation methods," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 10, pages 1-31.
    15. Pascal L. Ghazalian, 2012. "Home Bias in Primary Agricultural and Processed Food Trade: Assessing the Effects of National Degree of Uncertainty Aversion," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(2), pages 265-290, June.
    16. Agnosteva, Delina E. & Anderson, James E. & Yotov, Yoto V., 2019. "Intra-national trade costs: Assaying regional frictions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 32-50.
    17. Chen, Natalie & Novy, Dennis, 2008. "International Trade Integration: A Disaggregated Approach," CEPR Discussion Papers 7103, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Jan Fidrmuc & Jarko Fidrmuc, 2003. "Disintegration and Trade," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(5), pages 811-829, November.
    19. Lionel Fontagné & Thierry Mayer & Soledad Zignago, 2005. "Trade in the Triad: how easy is the access to large markets?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 38(4), pages 1401-1430, November.
    20. Baldwin, Richard E. & Skudelny, Frauke & Taglioni, Daria, 2005. "Trade effects of the euro: evidence from sectoral data," Working Paper Series 446, European Central Bank.

    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:eps:cepswp:5528. 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: Margarita Minkova (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepssbe.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.