IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpit/9608001.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On Theories Explaining the Success of the Gravity Equation

Author

Listed:
  • Simon J. Evenett

    (University of Michigan Business School)

  • Wolfgang Keller

    (University of Wisconsin and NBER)

Abstract

We analyze two main theories of international trade, the Heckscher-Ohlin theory and the Increasing Returns trade theory, by examining whether they can account for the empirical success of the so-called Gravity Equation. Since versions of both models can generate this prediction, we tackle the model identification problem by conditioning bilateral trade relations on factor endownment differences and the share of intra-industry trade, because only for large factor endowment differences does the Heckscher-Ohlin model generate specialization of production and the Gravity Equation, and it predicts inter-, not intra-industry trade. There are three major findings: First, little production is perfectly specialized due to factor endowment differences, making the perfect specialization version of the Heckscher-Ohlin model an unlikely candidate to explain the empirical success of the Gravity Equation. Second, increasing returns are important causes for perfect product specialization and the Gravity Equation, especially among industrialized countries. Third, to the extent that production is not perfectly specialized across countries, we find support for both Heckscher-Ohlin and Increasing Returns models. Based on these findings, we argue that both models explain different components of the international variation of production patterns and trade volumes, with important implications for productivity growth, labor, and macro economics.

Suggested Citation

  • Simon J. Evenett & Wolfgang Keller, 1996. "On Theories Explaining the Success of the Gravity Equation," International Trade 9608001, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 15 Jul 1998.
  • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpit:9608001
    Note: Type of Document - Latex (scientific word 2.0); prepared on IBM PC ; to print on HP/PostScript; pages: 22 ; figures: download here or request from authors.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/it/papers/9608/9608001.tex
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/it/papers/9608/9608001.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/it/papers/9608/9608001.ps.gz
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Donald R. Davis & David E. Weinstein, 1996. "Does Economic Geography Matter for International Specialization?," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1773, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
    2. Davis, Donald R. & David E. Weinstein & Scott C. Bradford & Kazushige Shimpo, 1997. "Using International and Japanese Regional Data to Determine When the Factor Abundance Theory of Trade Works," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(3), pages 421-446, June.
    3. Werner Antweiler & Daniel Trefler, 2002. "Increasing Returns and All That: A View from Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 93-119, March.
    4. Leamer, Edward E. & Levinsohn, James, 1995. "International trade theory: The evidence," Handbook of International Economics, in: G. M. Grossman & K. Rogoff (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 26, pages 1339-1394, Elsevier.
    5. Jonathan Eaton & Samuel Kortum, 1997. "Technology and Bilateral Trade," NBER Working Papers 6253, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Hardle, Wolfgang & Linton, Oliver, 1986. "Applied nonparametric methods," Handbook of Econometrics, in: R. F. Engle & D. McFadden (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 38, pages 2295-2339, Elsevier.
    7. Dixit, Avinash K & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1977. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 297-308, June.
    8. Alan V. Deardorff, 2011. "Determinants of Bilateral Trade: Does Gravity Work in a Neoclassical World?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Robert M Stern (ed.), Comparative Advantage, Growth, And The Gains From Trade And Globalization A Festschrift in Honor of Alan V Deardorff, chapter 24, pages 267-293, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    9. Gary R. Saxonhouse, 1989. "Differentiated Products, Economies of Scale, and Access to the Japanese Market," NBER Chapters, in: Trade Policies for International Competitiveness, pages 145-184, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. J. Finger, 1975. "A new view of the product cycle theory," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 111(1), pages 79-99, March.
    11. Trefler, Daniel & Zhu, Susan Chun, 2010. "The structure of factor content predictions," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 195-207, November.
    12. Harrigan, James, 1996. "Openness to trade in manufactures in the OECD," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1-2), pages 23-39, February.
    13. David Greenaway & Robert Hine & Chris Milner, 1994. "Country-specific factors and the pattern of horizontal and vertical intra-industry trade in the UK," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 130(1), pages 77-100, March.
    14. James R. Markusen, 2021. "Explaining the Volume of Trade: An Eclectic Approach," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: BROADENING TRADE THEORY Incorporating Market Realities into Traditional Models, chapter 9, pages 177-186, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    15. Bergstrand, Jeffrey H, 1990. "The Heckscher-Ohlin-Samuelson Model, the Linder Hypothesis and the Determinants of Bilateral Intra-industry Trade," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(403), pages 1216-1229, December.
    16. Helpman, Elhanan, 1987. "Imperfect competition and international trade: Evidence from fourteen industrial countries," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 62-81, March.
    17. Chipman, John Somerset, 1987. "International trade," Discussion Papers, Series II 24, University of Konstanz, Collaborative Research Centre (SFB) 178 "Internationalization of the Economy".
    18. World Bank, 2000. "World Development Indicators 2000," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 13828, December.
    19. Davis, Donald R., 1995. "Intra-industry trade: A Heckscher-Ohlin-Ricardo approach," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3-4), pages 201-226, November.
    20. David Hummels & James Levinsohn, 1995. "Monopolistic Competition and International Trade: Reconsidering the Evidence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(3), pages 799-836.
    21. Fontagné, Lionel & Freudenberg, Michael & Péridy, Nicolas, 1998. "Intra-Industry Trade and the Single Market: Quality Matters," CEPR Discussion Papers 1959, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    22. Haveman, J. & Hummels, D., 1997. "What Can We Learn from Bilateral Trade? Gravity and Beyond," Papers 97-002, Purdue University, Krannert School of Management - Center for International Business Education and Research (CIBER).
    23. Markusen, James R & Wigle, Randall M, 1990. "Explaining the Volume of North-South Trade," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(403), pages 1206-1215, December.
    24. Hardle, Wolfgang & Linton, Oliver, 1986. "Applied nonparametric methods," Handbook of Econometrics, in: R. F. Engle & D. McFadden (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 38, pages 2295-2339, Elsevier.
    25. Helpman, Elhanan, 1981. "International trade in the presence of product differentiation, economies of scale and monopolistic competition : A Chamberlin-Heckscher-Ohlin approach," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 305-340, August.
    26. Robert C. Feenstra, 1989. "Trade Policies for International Competitiveness," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number feen89-1, March.
    27. Davis, Donald R, 1997. "Critical Evidence on Comparative Advantage? North-North Trade in a Multilateral World," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(5), pages 1051-1060, October.
    28. Anderson, James E, 1979. "A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 106-116, March.
    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. Donald R. Davis & David E. Weinstein, 2001. "An Account of Global Factor Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1423-1453, December.
    2. Donald R. Davis & David E. Weinstein, 1998. "Market Access, Economic Geography and Comparative Advantage: An Empirical Assessment," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1850, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
    3. Elhanan Helpman, 1999. "The Structure of Foreign Trade," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 13(2), pages 121-144, Spring.
    4. F Trionfetti, 1999. "On the Home Market Effect: Theory and Empirical Evidence," CEP Discussion Papers dp0430, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    5. Davis, Donald R. & Weinstein, David E., 1999. "Economic geography and regional production structure: An empirical investigation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 379-407, February.
    6. Greenaway, David & Torstensson, Johan, 2000. "Economic Geography, Comparative Advantage and Trade within Industries: Evidence from the OECD," Journal of Economic Integration, Center for Economic Integration, Sejong University, vol. 15, pages 260-280.
    7. Brülhart, Marius & Trionfetti, Federico, 2009. "A test of trade theories when expenditure is home biased," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(7), pages 830-845, October.
    8. Donald R. Davis & David E. Weinstein, 2001. "Do Factor Endowments Matter for North-North Trade?," NBER Working Papers 8516, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Donald R. Davis & David E. Weinstein, 1996. "Does Economic Geography Matter for International Specialization?," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1773, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
    10. Bernstein, Jeffrey R. & Weinstein, David E., 2002. "Do endowments predict the location of production?: Evidence from national and international data," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 55-76, January.
    11. Marius BRÜLHART & Federico TRIONFETTI, 1999. "Home-Biased Demand and International Specialisation : A Test of Trade Theories," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'économie 9918, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, Département d’économie.
    12. Robert C. Shelburne, 2002. "Bilateral Intra-Industry Trade in a Multi-Country Helpman-Krugman Model," International Economic Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(4), pages 53-73.
    13. Ramezzana, Paolo, 2000. "Per capita income demand for variety, and international trade: Linder reconsidered," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 20184, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. Peter Egger, 2000. "Teilprojekt 4: Bilaterale Wirtschaftsbeziehungen zwischen der EU und ausgewählten mittel- und osteuropäischen Ländern (MOEL): Entwicklungen der letzten Jahre und Versuch einer Prognose," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 19262, April.
    15. David Greenaway & Johan Torstensson, 1997. "Back to the future: Taking stock on intra-industry trade," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 133(2), pages 249-269, June.
    16. Yongcheol Shin & Laura Serlenga, 2004. "Gravity Models of the Intra-EU Trade: Application of the Hausman-Taylor Estimation in Heterogeneous Panels with Common Time-specific Factors," Econometric Society 2004 Far Eastern Meetings 671, Econometric Society.
    17. Alan V. Deardorff, 2011. "Determinants of Bilateral Trade: Does Gravity Work in a Neoclassical World?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Robert M Stern (ed.), Comparative Advantage, Growth, And The Gains From Trade And Globalization A Festschrift in Honor of Alan V Deardorff, chapter 24, pages 267-293, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    18. Jonathan Eaton & Samuel Kortum, 1997. "Technology and Bilateral Trade," NBER Working Papers 6253, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Paas, Tiiu, 2002. "Gravity approach for exploring Baltic Sea regional integration in the field of international trade," HWWA Discussion Papers 180, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWA).
    20. Joan A. Martín & Vicente Orts, 2001. "A two-stage analysis of monopolistic competition models of intraindustry trade," Investigaciones Economicas, Fundación SEPI, vol. 25(2), pages 315-333, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Heckscher-Ohlin trade theory; Gravity equation; Re-sampling; Monopolistic competition trade theory; Model Identification;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F11 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Neoclassical Models of Trade
    • F12 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Models of Trade with Imperfect Competition and Scale Economies; Fragmentation
    • C14 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Semiparametric and Nonparametric Methods: General

    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:wpa:wuwpit:9608001. 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: EconWPA (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    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.