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

Changes in Bilateral Trade Costs between European Union Member States & Major Trading Partners: An Empirical Analysis from 1989 - 2006

Contents:

Author Info

  • Beltramo, Theresa

Abstract

Today, more than 50 years after the Rome Treaty, the EU has made great strides in its’ economic integration and liberalization of movement of goods and people. International trade theory predicts deepening economic integration inside the European Union will increase regional trade and have large effects on agglomeration of industry patterns. In particular, the Core Periphery theory predicts the core of Western Europe and center of economic prosperity will spread economic growth to the periphery through increased integration. Thus, it is hoped that the EU Core, who benefit from their central location and a long history of integration in Western Europe, will increase growth to the periphery through deepening integration and a relative drop in trade costs. Critics cite the Spring 2010 debt crisis in Greece and subsequent shock to Euro zone stability as an indication that EU integration has not been successful. Given increased skepticism of the Euro zone, measuring changes in trade costs between 2001 Euro adopters and the main trading partners provides one quantitative measure to better understand the depth of EU integration in the recent period from 1989‐2006. Using the Novy (2008) model, which measures bilateral trade costs directly from trade flows, the measure includes all trade costs incurred in getting a good to its’ final user, other than the production cost of the good itself. Results show the drop in trade costs over the more recent period 1995‐2006 to be largest for trade between countries who adopt the Euro in 2001 (‐53%). The second largest drop in bilateral trade costs is between 2001 Euro adopters and the Central Eastern European Countries who joined the EU in 2004 (‐49%). The third largest drop in bilateral trade costs is between the 2001 Euro adopters group and the large non‐continental Europe trading partners (‐45%). Large differences in trade costs appear between countries within the 2001 Euro adopters who are considered members of the Core versus those in the Periphery. Over the 1995‐ 2006 period trade costs drop by 24% more for trade within the Core versus Trade between the Core and the Periphery. While the Core‐Periphery theory is slow to be realized in our empirical results of trade costs over the 1995‐2006 period; trade costs among EU members and Euro adopters are relatively large‐ 33‐53%‐ when compared to trade costs measured for the non‐continental European trading partners‐5%. This 7‐11 times larger drop in trade costs for trade intra‐EU and Euro adopter members‐ both original and accession‐ is an empirical testament to the EU’s success at integrating diverse economies within the union.

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://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/24259/
File Function: original version
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 24259.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: Jul 2010
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:24259

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Schackstr. 4, D-80539 Munich, Germany
Phone: +49-(0)89-2180-2219
Fax: +49-(0)89-2180-3900
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: International Trade; Core-Periphery; and Economic Geography.;

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. Winters, L. Alan, 1996. "Regionalism versus Multilateralism," CEPR Discussion Papers, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers 1525, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  2. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2001. "Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to the Border Puzzle," NBER Working Papers 8079, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. BEHRENS, Kristian & GAIGNE, Carl & OTTAVIANO, Gianmarco I.P. & THISSE, Jacques-François, . "Countries, regions and trade: on the welfare impacts of economic integration," CORE Discussion Papers RP, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE) -1936, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  4. Dennis Novy, 2011. "Gravity Redux: Measuring International Trade Costs with Panel Data," CESifo Working Paper Series 3616, CESifo Group Munich.
  5. Schürmann, Carsten & Talaat, Ahmed, 2002. "The European peripherality index," ERSA conference papers ersa02p224, European Regional Science Association.
  6. Portes, Richard & Rey, Hélène, 1999. "The Determinants of Cross-Border Equity Flows," CEPR Discussion Papers, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers 2225, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  7. Andrew K. Rose, 2002. "Do We Really Know that the WTO Increases Trade?," NBER Working Papers 9273, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  8. repec:fth:coluec:9596-04 is not listed on IDEAS
  9. Bhagwati, Jagdish & Panagariya, Arvind, 1996. "The Theory of Preferential Trade Agreements: Historical Evolution and Current Trends," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 86(2), pages 82-87, May.
  10. Deardorff, A.V., 1995. "Determinants of Bilateral Trade : Does Gravity Work in a Neoclassical World?," Papers, Michigan - Center for Research on Economic & Social Theory 95-05, Michigan - Center for Research on Economic & Social Theory.
  11. Masahisa Fujita & Tomoya Mori, 2005. "Frontiers of the New Economic Geography," KIER Working Papers 604, Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research.
  12. Alberto F. Ades & Edward L. Glaeser, 1994. "Trade and Circuses: Explaining Urban Giants," NBER Working Papers 4715, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  13. Paul Krugman, 1990. "Increasing Returns and Economic Geography," NBER Working Papers 3275, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  14. James E. Anderson & Douglas Marcouiller, S.J., 1999. "Insecurity and the Pattern of Trade: An Empirical Investigation," Boston College Working Papers in Economics, Boston College Department of Economics 418, Boston College Department of Economics, revised 03 Aug 2000.
  15. 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 474-81, August.
  16. Bhagwati, Jagdish & Greenaway, David & Panagariya, Arvind, 1998. "Trading Preferentially: Theory and Policy," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, Royal Economic Society, vol. 108(449), pages 1128-48, July.
  17. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2004. "Trade Costs," NBER Working Papers 10480, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  18. Behrens, Kristian & Gaigné, Carl & Ottaviano, Gianmarco Ireo Paolo & Thisse, Jacques-François, 2003. "Inter-regional and International Trade: Seventy Years After Ohlin," CEPR Discussion Papers, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers 4065, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  19. 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.
  20. Silvia Nenci, 2009. "Tariff liberatization and the growth of word trade: A comparative historiocal analysis to evaluate the multilateral trading system," Departmental Working Papers of Economics - University 'Roma Tre' 0110, Department of Economics - University Roma Tre.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

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:pra:mprapa:24259. 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: (Ekkehart Schlicht).

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.