IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/oec/ecoaaa/610-en.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Have Developed Countries Escaped the Curse of Distance?

Author

Listed:
  • Hervé Boulhol

    (OECD)

  • Alain de Serres

    (OECD)

Abstract

There is widespread evidence that a better access to markets contributes to raising income levels. However, no quantification of the impact of distance to markets has been made on the basis of a sample restricted to advanced — and therefore more homogeneous — countries. This paper applies the framework developed by Redding and Venables (2004) on a panel data covering 21 OECD countries over 1970-2004, and shows that, relative to the average OECD country, the cost of remoteness for countries such as Australia and New Zealand could be as high as 10% of GDP. Conversely, the benefit for centrally-located countries like Belgium and the Netherlands could be around 6-7%. Second, the paper explains why the key estimated parameter in the Redding-Venables model is biased upwards in cross-section samples that mix both developing and developed countries, because of the inability to adequately control for heterogeneity in technology levels across countries. The paper also provides a detailed discussion of the links between the ?death-of-distance? hypothesis, the evolution of transport costs and that of the elasticity of trade to distance. Les pays développés ont-ils échappé à la malédiction de la distance ? De nombreuses études empiriques ont montré qu‘un meilleur accès aux marchés contribue à augmenter les revenus. Cependant, aucune quantification de l‘impact de la distance aux marchés n‘a été effectuée à partir d‘un échantillon homogène limité aux pays développés. Ce papier applique le cadre développé par Redding and Venables (2004) à des données de panel couvrant 21 pays de l‘OCDE entre 1970 et 2004, et montre que, relativement à la moyenne des pays de l‘OCDE, le coût de l‘éloignement géographique pour des pays comme l‘Australie et la Nouvelle Zélande s‘élève à environ 10% de PIB. Réciproquement, le bénéfice que tirent les pays ayant une position centrale comme la Belgique et les Pays-Bas serait de l‘ordre de 6-7%. Deuxièmement, cette étude explique pourquoi le paramètre-clé dans le modèle Redding-Venables est biaisé à la hausse dans des échantillons en coupe qui mêlent pays développés et en développement, en raison de l‘incapacité à contrôler l‘hétérogénéité des niveaux technologiques entre pays. Le papier propose également une discussion détaillée des liens entre l‘hypothèse de la « fin de la distance », l‘évolution des coûts de transport et celle de l‘élasticité du commerce à la distance.

Suggested Citation

  • Hervé Boulhol & Alain de Serres, 2008. "Have Developed Countries Escaped the Curse of Distance?," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 610, OECD Publishing.
  • Handle: RePEc:oec:ecoaaa:610-en
    DOI: 10.1787/241705110254
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1787/241705110254
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1787/241705110254?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:

    More about this item

    Keywords

    accès aux marchés; coûts de transport; distance; distance; economic geography; market access; transport costs; économie géographique;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F12 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Models of Trade with Imperfect Competition and Scale Economies; Fragmentation
    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration
    • R11 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Regional Economic Activity: Growth, Development, Environmental Issues, and Changes
    • R12 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Size and Spatial Distributions of Regional Economic Activity; Interregional Trade (economic geography)

    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:oec:ecoaaa:610-en. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/edoecfr.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.