IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ude/wpaper/0418.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Why Do Countries Engage in the Preferential Trade Agreement Network?

Author

Listed:
  • Marcel Vaillant

    (Departamento de Economía, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de la República)

  • Flavia Rovira

    (Centro de Investigaciones Económicas)

Abstract

We analyze the determinants of Preferential Trade Agreements Networks dynamics. We propose a theoretical framework based in an extension of Baldwin (1995) to rationalize the determinants of PTA formation as a way to maximize preferential market access and/or diminish market discrimination. To build the empirical model we use a Stochastic Actor Oriented Models proposed by Snijders (2001). We suppose that three main set of variables will affect the countries motivation to change their PTA neighborhood at each moment. The first is related to natural trade cost and market size. The second group is related to political economy effects. And finally, we include a variable related to trade specialization, which has not been used in earlier works to explain PTAs. Following Snijders et al. (2012) we also control for hierarchy structures of the PTA, and we extend their work by analyzing the change in this phenomenon when considering a broader period of time. Results show that the signs of usual variables behave as expected in the literature for the first period but hierarchy effect dilutes after 2004. As a contribution to existing literature we found that trade rivalry between countries is also significant in explaining the dynamics of PTA.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcel Vaillant & Flavia Rovira, 2018. "Why Do Countries Engage in the Preferential Trade Agreement Network?," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 0418, Department of Economics - dECON.
    • Handle: RePEc:ude:wpaper:0418
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12008/19970
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. C. Fred Bergsten, 1996. "Competitive Liberalization and Global Free Trade: A Vision for the Early 21st Century," Working Paper Series WP96-15, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    2. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1995. "The Politics of Free-Trade Agreements," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 667-690, September.
    3. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1994. "Protection for Sale," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 833-850, September.
    4. Baldwin,Richard & Haapararanta,Pertti & Kiander,Jaakko (ed.), 1995. "Expanding Membership of the European Union," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521481342.
    5. Edward D. Mansfield & Helen V. Milner & B. Peter Rosendorff, 2015. "Why Democracies Cooperate More: Electoral Control and International Trade Agreements," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Edward D Mansfield (ed.), THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE, chapter 11, pages 227-263, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Leonardo Baccini & Wilfred M. Chow, 2018. "The Politics of Preferential Trade Liberalization in Authoritarian Countries," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(2), pages 189-216, March.
    7. Baier, Scott L. & Bergstrand, Jeffrey H., 2004. "Economic determinants of free trade agreements," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 29-63, October.
    8. Scott L. Baier & Jeffrey H. Bergstrand & Ronald Mariutto, 2014. "Economic Determinants of Free Trade Agreements Revisited: Distinguishing Sources of Interdependence," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(1), pages 31-58, February.
    9. C. A. Hidalgo & B. Klinger & A. -L. Barabasi & R. Hausmann, 2007. "The Product Space Conditions the Development of Nations," Papers 0708.2090, arXiv.org.
    10. Mark S. Manger & Mark A. Pickup, 2016. "The Coevolution of Trade Agreement Networks and Democracy," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 60(1), pages 164-191, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Richard Baldwin, 2008. "Big-Think Regionalism: A Critical Survey," NBER Working Papers 14056, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Baldwin, Richard Edward & Rieder , Roland, 2007. "A Test of Endogenous Trade Bloc Formation Theory on EU Data," East Asian Economic Review, Korea Institute for International Economic Policy, vol. 11(2), pages 77-110, December.
    3. Marco Fugazza & Frédéric Robert-Nicoud, 2014. "The “Emulator Effect” of the Uruguay Round on US Regionalism," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 1049-1078, November.
    4. S. Standaert & G. Rayp, 2012. "Regional Integration Agreements and Rent-Seeking in Africa," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 12/773, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    5. Ross Jestrab, 2021. "The effects of domestic labour mobility on trade agreements: Empirical evidence," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(8), pages 2238-2283, August.
    6. Baccini, Leonardo, 2012. "Democratization and trade policy: an empirical analysis of developing countries," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 44924, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Marco Fugazza & Frédéric Robert-Nicoud, 2012. "The ‘Emulator Effect’ Of The Uruguay Round On United States Regionalism," UNCTAD Blue Series Papers 51, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.
    8. Maggi, Giovanni, 2014. "International Trade Agreements," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 317-390, Elsevier.
    9. Giovanni Facchini & Peri Silva & Gerald Willmann, 2015. "The Political Economy of Preferential Trade Arrangements: An Empirical Investigation," Discussion Papers 2015-16, University of Nottingham, GEP.
    10. Rupa Duttagupta & Arvind Panagariya, 2007. "Free Trade Areas And Rules Of Origin: Economics And Politics," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(2), pages 169-190, July.
    11. Cole, Matthew T. & Lake, James & Zissimos, Ben, 2021. "Contesting an international trade agreement," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    12. Winters, L. Alan, 1996. "Regionalism versus Multilateralism," CEPR Discussion Papers 1525, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    13. Hinz, Julian, 2017. "The ties that bind: Geopolitical motivations for economic integration," Kiel Working Papers 2085, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    14. Ornelas, Emanuel, 2012. "Preferential trade agreements and the labor market," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121752, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    15. Ornelas, Emanuel & Tovar, Patricia, 2022. "Intra-bloc tariffs and preferential margins in trade agreements," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    16. Leonardo Baccini, 2010. "Explaining formation and design of EU trade agreements: The role of transparency and flexibility," European Union Politics, , vol. 11(2), pages 195-217, June.
    17. Florian Kiesow Cortez & Jerg Gutmann, 2021. "Domestic Institutions and the Ratification of International Agreements in a Panel of Democracies," International Law and Economics, in: Florian Kiesow Cortez (ed.), The Political Economy of International Agreements, pages 37-62, Springer.
    18. Baldwin, Richard & Jaimovich, Dany, 2012. "Are Free Trade Agreements contagious?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 1-16.
    19. Edward D. Mansfield & Helen V. Milner & Jon C. Pevehouse, 2008. "Democracy, Veto Players and the Depth of Regional Integration," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 67-96, January.
    20. Harold D Chiang & Yukun Ma & Joel Rodrigue & Yuya Sasaki, 2021. "Dyadic double/debiased machine learning for analyzing determinants of free trade agreements," Papers 2110.04365, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2022.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Preferential Trade Agreements; networks;

    JEL classification:

    • F02 - International Economics - - General - - - International Economic Order and Integration
    • 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:ude:wpaper:0418. 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: Andrea Doneschi or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/derauuy.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.