This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Trade preferences to small developing countries and the welfare costs of lost multilateral liberalization

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Limao, Nuno
Olarreaga, Marcelo

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

The proliferation of preferential trade liberalization over the past 20 years has raised the question of whether it slows down multilateral trade liberalization. Recent theoretical and empirical evidence indicates this is the case even for unilateral preferences that industrial countries provide to small and poor countries but there is no estimate of the resulting welfare costs. To avoid this stumbling block effect the authors suggest replacing unilateral preferences by a fixed import subsidy. They argue that this scheme would reduce the drag of preferences on multilateral liberalization and generate a Pareto improvement. More important, the authors provide the first estimates of the welfare cost of preferential liberalization as a stumbling block to multilateral liberalization. By combining recent estimates of the stumbling block effect of preferences with data for 170 countries and over 5,000 products they calculate the welfare effects of the United States, European Union, and Japan switching from unilateral preferences to the developing countries to the import subsidy scheme. Even in a model with no dynamic gains to trade the authors find that the switch produces an annual net welfare gain for the 170 countries ($4,354 million) and for each group: the United States, European Union, and Japan ($2,934 million), the developing countries ($520 million), and the rest of the world ($900 million).

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. 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://www-wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2005/04/21/000012009_20050421123451/Rendered/PDF/wps3565.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by The World Bank in its series Policy Research Working Paper Series with number 3565.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 01 Apr 2005
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:3565

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 1818 H Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20433
Email:
Web page: http://www.worldbank.org/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Roula I. Yazigi).

Related research
Keywords: TF054105-DONOR FUNDED OPERATION ADMINISTRATION FEE INCOME AND EXPENSE ACCOUNT; Environmental Economics&Policies; Economic Theory&Research; Trade and Regional Integration; Export Competitiveness;

Other versions of this item:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports: 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.:
  1. Aaditya Mattoo & Arvind Subramanian, 2004. "The WTO and the Poorest Countries: The Stark Reality," IMF Working Papers 04/81, International Monetary Fund. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  2. Hiau Looi Kee & Nicita, Alessandro & Olarreaga, Marcelo, 2004. "Import demand elasticities and trade distortions," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3452, The World Bank. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  3. Azam, Jean-Paul & Laffont, Jean-Jacques, 2003. "Contracting for aid," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 25-58, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Won Chang & L. Alan Winters, 2002. "How Regional Blocs Affect Excluded Countries: The Price Effects of MERCOSUR," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 889-904, September. [Downloadable!]
  5. Limão, Nuno, 2005. "Preferential Trade Agreements as Stumbling Blocks for Multilateral Trade Liberalization: Evidence for the US," CEPR Discussion Papers 4884, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. T.N. Srinivasan, 1999. "Developing Countries in the World Trading System: From GATT, 1947, to the Third Ministerial Meeting of WTO, 1999," The World Economy, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 22(8), pages 1047-1064, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  7. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 1999. "An Economic Theory of GATT," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 215-248, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  8. Hans P. Lankes & Katerina Alexandraki, 2004. "The Impact of Preference Erosion on Middle-Income Developing Countries," IMF Working Papers 04/169, International Monetary Fund. [Downloadable!]
  9. Levy, Philip I, 1997. "A Political-Economic Analysis of Free-Trade Agreements," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(4), pages 506-19, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  10. Panagariya, Arvind & Shah, Shekhar & Mishra, Deepak, 2001. "Demand elasticities in international trade: are they really low?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 313-342, April. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  11. Carlo Perroni & John Whalley, 2000. "The new regionalism: trade liberalization or insurance?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 33(1), pages 1-24, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  12. McCulloch, Rachel & Pinera, Jose, 1977. "Trade as Aid: The Political Economy of Tariff Preferences for Developing Countries," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(5), pages 959-67, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  13. Karacaovali, Baybars & Limão, Nuno, 2005. "The Clash of Liberalizations: Preferential vs. Multilateral Trade Liberalization in the European Union," CEPR Discussion Papers 4973, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  14. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 1997. "Regionalism and Multilateral Tariff Cooperation," NBER Working Papers 5921, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  15. Lim“o, Nuno, 2002. "Are Preferential trade Agreements with Non-trade Objectives a Stumbling Block for Multilateral Liberalization?," Royal Economic Society Annual Conference 2002 129, Royal Economic Society. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  16. Pravin Krishna, 1998. "Regionalism And Multilateralism: A Political Economy Approach," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 113(1), pages 227-250, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  17. Brown, Drusilla, 1989. "A computational analysis of Japan's generalized system of preferences," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 103-128, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  18. Limao, Nuno & Venables, Anthony J., 1999. "Infrastructure, geographical disadvantage, and transport costs," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2257, The World Bank. [Downloadable!]
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, 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.)

  1. J. Francois & B. Hoekman & M. Manchin, 2005. "Preference Erosion and Multilateral Trade Liberalization," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 05-073/2, Tinbergen Institute. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  2. Anderson, Kym & Martin, Will, 2005. "Agricultural trade reform and the Doha development agenda," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3607, The World Bank. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  3. Bchir, Mohamed Hedi & Karingi, Stephen N. & Mold, Andrew & Osakwe, Patrick N. & Jallab, Mustapha Sadni, 2006. "The Doha Development Round and Africa: Partial and General Equilibrium Analyses of Tariff Preference Erosion," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25240, International Association of Agricultural Economists. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  4. Hoekman. Bernard & Prowse, Susan, 2005. "Economic policy responses to preference erosion : from trade as aid toaid for trade," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3721, The World Bank. [Downloadable!]
  5. Karacaovali, Baybars & Limão, Nuno, 2005. "The Clash of Liberalizations: Preferential vs. Multilateral Trade Liberalization in the European Union," CEPR Discussion Papers 4973, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  6. Baybars Karacaovali & Nuno Limao, 2008. "The Clash of Liberalizations: Preferential versus Multilateral Trade Liberalization in the European Union," Fordham Economics Discussion Paper Series dp2008-02, Fordham University, Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  7. Jean-Christophe Bureau & Raja Chakir & Jacques Gallezot, 2007. "The Utilisation of EU and US Trade Preferences for Developing Countries in the Agri-Food Sector," The Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper Series iiisdp193, IIIS. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? RePEc and its associated services are free for contributors and users, and do not accept any advertising.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-25.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.