IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hig/wpaper/26-ir-2016.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

It’S Not the Economy Stupid! Is Russia-Us Trade Really Underdeveloped? A Test Using Gravity Models

Author

Listed:
  • Maxim Bratersky

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics)

  • Gunes Gokmen

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics)

  • Andrej Krickovic

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics)

Abstract

Politicians, pundits and experts in both Russia and the US frequently bemoan the “underdevelopment” of US-Russia trade, arguing that political factors have inhibited the development of economic ties. It is also often argued that political relations between the two countries would also be more cooperative and less conflictual if these ties developed up to their full potential. The paper seeks to test the conventional wisdom that the US-Russia trade is underdeveloped by employing a standard gravity model to measure where trade between the two countries “should” be. We find no evidence that the US-Russia trade is underdeveloped. In terms of its ability to live up to the predictions of the model, trade between the two countries is predicted by the standard determinants of trade, suggesting that there is nothing erratic about the US-Russia trade and it behaves like any average country pair. These findings suggest that US-Russia trade relations actually live up to their economic potential and that the commonly held idea that political relations between Russia and the US can be dramatically improved by tapping into the “unfulfilled” promise of improved trade relations is unfounded. Moreover, our analysis demonstrates that the sectorial structure of the two economies, factor endowments and comparative advantages do not seem to indicate that there is significant potential for increased trade, as the conventional wisdom would suggest. The conventional view argues that poor political relations have impeded the development of economic relations between the two states. But, in fact, the opposite may be true: relations between the US and Russia are characterized by rivalry and conflict because there is little solid economic grounds for more pacific relations

Suggested Citation

  • Maxim Bratersky & Gunes Gokmen & Andrej Krickovic, 2016. "It’S Not the Economy Stupid! Is Russia-Us Trade Really Underdeveloped? A Test Using Gravity Models," HSE Working papers WP BRP 26/IR/2016, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:hig:wpaper:26/ir/2016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.hse.ru/data/2016/02/09/1139990257/26IR2016.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Zeev Maoz, 2009. "The Effects of Strategic and Economic Interdependence on International Conflict Across Levels of Analysis," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(1), pages 223-240, January.
    3. Doyle, Michael W., 2005. "Three Pillars of the Liberal Peace," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 99(3), pages 463-466, August.
    4. van Bergeijk,Peter A. G. & Brakman,Steven (ed.), 2010. "The Gravity Model in International Trade," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521196154.
    5. Bergstrand, Jeffrey H, 1989. "The Generalized Gravity Equation, Monopolistic Competition, and the Factor-Proportions Theory in International Trade," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 71(1), pages 143-153, February.
    6. Robert C. Feenstra, 2002. "Border Effects and the Gravity Equation: Consistent Methods for Estimation," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 49(5), pages 491-506, November.
    7. Andrei Shleifer & Daniel Treisman, "undated". "Normal Countries: The East 25 Years After Communism," Working Paper 204036, Harvard University OpenScholar.
    8. Dixon, William J., 1994. "Democracy and the Peaceful Settlement of International Conflict," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(1), pages 14-32, March.
    9. Erik Gartzke, 2007. "The Capitalist Peace," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(1), pages 166-191, January.
    10. Baldwin, Richard, 2007. "Trade Effects of the Euro: a Comparison of Estimators," Journal of Economic Integration, Center for Economic Integration, Sejong University, vol. 22, pages 780-818.
    11. Anders Aslund & Gary Clyde Hufbauer, 2012. "The United States Should Establish Permanent Normal Trade Relations with Russia," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 6208, October.
    12. Fearon, James D., 1994. "Domestic Political Audiences and the Escalation of International Disputes," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(3), pages 577-592, September.
    13. Allan Dafoe, 2011. "Statistical Critiques of the Democratic Peace: Caveat Emptor," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(2), pages 247-262, April.
    14. Oneal, John R. & Russett, Bruce, 2001. "Clear and Clean: The Fixed Effects of the Liberal Peace," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(2), pages 469-485, April.
    15. Roberto Rigobon & Dani Rodrik, 2005. "Rule of law, democracy, openness, and income," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 13(3), pages 533-564, July.
    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. (ed.), 0. "Research Handbook on Economic Diplomacy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 16053.

    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. Kareem, Fatima Olanike & Martinez-Zarzoso, Inmaculada & Brümmer, Bernhard, 2016. "Fitting the Gravity Model when Zero Trade Flows are Frequent: a Comparison of Estimation Techniques using Africa's Trade Data," GlobalFood Discussion Papers 230588, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    2. Tomas Havranek & Zuzana Irsova, 2017. "Do Borders Really Slash Trade? A Meta-Analysis," IMF Economic Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Monetary Fund, vol. 65(2), pages 365-396, June.
    3. Johann Park, 2013. "Forward to the future? The democratic peace after the Cold War," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 30(2), pages 178-194, April.
    4. David Altman & Federico Rojas-de-Galarreta & Francisco Urdinez, 2021. "An interactive model of democratic peace," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(3), pages 384-398, May.
    5. Pascal L. Ghazalian, 2019. "Canada's beef exports: Border effects and prospects for market access," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 67(1), pages 53-74, March.
    6. Thomas L. Vollrath & Mark J. Gehlhar & Charles B. Hallahan, 2009. "Bilateral Import Protection, Free Trade Agreements, and Other Factors Influencing Trade Flows in Agriculture and Clothing," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(2), pages 298-317, June.
    7. Thi Hanh Vu, 2013. "International Export Flows of Vietnam :A Gravity Model Approach," Brussels Economic Review, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles, vol. 56(1), pages 83-108.
    8. Marie M Stack & Rob Ackrill & Martin Bliss, 2019. "Sugar trade and the role of historical colonial linkages," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 46(1), pages 79-108.
    9. Shahbaz Nasir & Kaliappa Kalirajan, 2016. "Information and Communication Technology-Enabled Modern Services Export Performances of Asian Economies," Asian Development Review, MIT Press, vol. 33(1), pages 1-27, March.
    10. Head, Keith & Mayer, Thierry, 2014. "Gravity Equations: Workhorse,Toolkit, and Cookbook," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 131-195, Elsevier.
    11. Hiroyuki Taguchi & Ni Lar, 2015. "Fragmentation And Trade Of Machinery Parts And Components In Mekong Region," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 60(05), pages 1-21, December.
    12. Valeria Costantini & Francesco Crespi, 2013. "Public policies for a sustainable energy sector: regulation, diversity and fostering of innovation," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 401-429, April.
    13. Daria Taglioni & Richard Baldwin, 2014. "Gravity chains: Estimating bilateral trade flows when parts and components trade is important," Journal of Banking and Financial Economics, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management, vol. 2(2), pages 61-82, November.
    14. Martínez-Zarzoso Inmaculada & Klasen Stephan & Nowak-Lehmann D. Felicitas & Larch Mario, 2009. "Does German Development Aid Promote German Exports?," German Economic Review, De Gruyter, vol. 10(3), pages 317-338, August.
    15. David B Carter, 2017. "History as a double-edged sword," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 16(4), pages 400-421, November.
    16. Befus, Tanja & Brockmeier, Martina & Bektasoglu, Beyhan, 2012. "Comparing Gravity Model Specifications to Estimate NTBs Using the GTAP Framework," Conference papers 332178, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    17. Tabellini, Marco & Magistretti, Giacomo, 2020. "Economic Integration and Democracy: An Empirical Investigation," CEPR Discussion Papers 14336, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Adu, Raymond & Litsios, Ioannis & Baimbridge, Mark, 2022. "ECOWAS single currency: Prospective effects on trade," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    19. Chahir Zaki, 2008. "Does trade facilitation matter in bilateral trade?," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne bla08100, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    20. Daniel Lederman & Çaglar Özden, 2007. "Geopolitical Interests And Preferential Access To U.S. Markets," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(2), pages 235-258, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    US-Russia Relations; International Trade; Gravity Models; Economic Interdependence;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • 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:hig:wpaper:26/ir/2016. 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: Shamil Abdulaev or Shamil Abdulaev (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/hsecoru.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.