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

Multilateral, Regional, and Bilateral Trade-Policy Options for the United States and Japan

Contents:

Author Info

  • Drusilla K. Brown
  • Alan V. Deardorff
  • Robert M. Stern

Abstract

We have used the Michigan Model of World Production and Trade to simulate the economic effects on the United States, Japan, and other major trading countries/regions of a prospective new round of WTO multilateral trade negotiations and a variety of regional/bilateral free trade agreements (FTAs) involving the United States and Japan. We estimate that an assumed reduction of post-Uruguay Round tariffs on agricultural and industrial products and services barriers by 33 percent in a new WTO trade round would increase world welfare by $613.0 billion, with gains of $177.3 billion for the United States, $123.7 billion for Japan, and significant gains for all other industrialized and developing countries/regions. If there were global free trade with all post-Uruguay Round trade barriers completely removed, world welfare would increase by $1.9 trillion, with gains of $537.2 billion (5.9 percent of GNP) for the United States and $374.8 billion (5.8 percent of GNP) for Japan. Regional agreements such as an APEC FTA, an ASEAN Plus 3 FTA, and a Western Hemisphere FTA would increase global and member country welfare but much less so than a new WTO multilateral trade round would. Separate bilateral FTAs involving Japan with Singapore, Mexico, Chile, and Korea and the United States with Chile, Singapore, and Korea would have positive, though generally small, welfare effects on the partner countries, but potentially disruptive sectoral employment shifts in some countries. There would be trade diversion and detrimental welfare effects on some nonmember countries for both the regional and bilateral FTAs analyzed. The welfare gains from multilateral trade liberalization are therefore considerably greater than the gains from preferential trading arrangements and more uniformly positive for all countries.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

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://ase.tufts.edu/econ/papers/200109.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Department of Economics, Tufts University in its series Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University with number 0109.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 2001
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:tuf:tuftec:0109

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Medford, MA 02155, USA
Phone: (617) 627-3560
Fax: (617) 627-3917
Web page: http://ase.tufts.edu/econ

Related research

Keywords:

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. Drusilla K. Brown & Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M. Stern, 2001. "CGE Modeling and Analysis of Multilateral and Regional Negotiating Options," Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University 0108, Department of Economics, Tufts University.
  2. Thomas W. Hertel, 2000. "Potential gains from reducing trade barriers in manufacturing, services and agriculture," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue Jul, pages 77-104.
  3. W. Jill Harrison & K.R. Pearson, 1994. "Computing Solutions for Large General Equilibrium Models Using GEMPACK," Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre Working Papers ip-64, Victoria University, Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre.
  4. Warwick McKibbin & Jong-Wha Lee & Inkyo Cheong, 2004. "A dynamic analysis of the Korea-Japan free trade area: simulations with the G-cubed Asia-Pacific model," International Economic Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 3-32.
  5. Drusilla K. Brown & Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M. Stern, 2000. "Computational Analysis of the Accession of Chile to the NAFTA and Western Hemisphere Integration," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(2), pages 145-174, 02.
  6. Bernard Hoekman, 2000. "The next round of services negotiations: identifying priorities and options," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue Jul, pages 31-52.
  7. Thomas W. Hertel & Bernard M. Hoekman & Will Martin, 2002. "Developing Countries and a New Round of WTO Negotiations," World Bank Research Observer, World Bank Group, vol. 17(1), pages 113-140.
  8. Hertel, Thomas W. & Will Martin, 1999. "Would Developing Countries Gain from Inclusion of Manufactures in the WTO Negotiations?," GTAP Working Papers 397, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
  9. Drusilla K. Brown & Robert M. Stern, 2000. "Measurement and Modeling of the Economic Effects of Trade and Investment Barriers in Services," Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University 0001, Department of Economics, Tufts University.
  10. W. Hertel, Thomas, 2001. "Dynamic Effects of the “New Age” Free Trade Agreement between Japan and Singapore," Journal of Economic Integration, Center for Economic Integration, Sejong University, vol. 16, pages 446-484.
  11. Drusilla K. Brown & Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M Stern, 2001. "Impacts on NAFTA Members of Multilateral and Regional Trading Arrangements and Initiatives and Harmonization of NAFTA's External Tariffs," Working Papers 471, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
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:tuf:tuftec:0109. 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: (Caroline Kalogeropoulos).

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.