IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

The Dark Side of the Generalized System of Preferences

  • Bernhard Herz
  • Marco Wagner

The Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) was established to promote the exports of low-income countries to industrialized countries in order to support their economic growth and development. However, the design of these schemes is rather complex and the e�ects of GSP have been found to be controversial. While previous studies solely analyzed preferential agreements of individual granting countries separately, implying a one-sided perspective, we take a general view and investigate the overall and dynamic e�ects common to the various GSP schemes in order to provide generalized recommendations for economic policy. In our empirical analysis, based on an extensive dataset covering most of world trade, we �nd that GSP tends to foster developing countries�exports in the short-run, but hampers them in the long-run. Also, GSP granting countries are able to promote their own exports initially, while in the long-run their exports decrease. Economically advanced GSP recipients 1 are more likely to bene�t from GSP than less advanced countries. Taken together, GSP does not seem to be a suitable instrument to promote sustainable economic growth and development of low-income countries.

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

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://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1467-9396.2011.00980.x
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Wiley Blackwell in its journal Review of International Economics.

Volume (Year): 19 (2011)
Issue (Month): 4 (09)
Pages: 763-775

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:bla:reviec:v:19:y:2011:i:4:p:763-775
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0965-7576

Order Information: Web: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/subs.asp?ref=0965-7576

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. 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.
  2. Grossman, Gene M. & Sykes, Alan O., 2005. "A preference for development: the law and economics of GSP," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(01), pages 41-67, March.
  3. Lars Nilsson, 2002. "Trading relations: is the roadmap from Lometo Cotonou correct?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(4), pages 439-452.
  4. Santos Silva, J.M.C & Tenreyro, Silvana, 2005. "The Log of Gravity," CEPR Discussion Papers 5311, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  5. Millimet, Daniel & Henderson, Daniel, 2006. "Is Gravity Linear?," Departmental Working Papers 0517, Southern Methodist University, Department of Economics.
  6. Michael Tomz & Judith L. Goldstein & Douglas Rivers, 2007. "Do We Really Know That the WTO Increases Trade? Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(5), pages 2005-2018, December.
  7. Martínez-Zarzoso, Inmaculada & Nowak-Lehmann D., Felicitas & Vollmer, Sebastian, 2007. "The log of gravity revisited," Center for European, Governance and Economic Development Research Discussion Papers 64, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
  8. Bernhard Herz & Marco Wagner, 2007. "Do the World Trade Organization and the Generalized System of Preferences foster bilateral trade?," Working Papers 020, Bavarian Graduate Program in Economics (BGPE).
  9. Peter Egger, 2002. "An Econometric View on the Estimation of Gravity Models and the Calculation of Trade Potentials," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 297-312, 02.
  10. Daniel Lederman & �Aglar �Zden, 2007. "Geopolitical Interests And Preferential Access To U.S. Markets," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(2), pages 235-258, 07.
  11. Persson, Maria & Wilhelmsson, Fredrik, 2006. "Assessing the Effects of EU Trade Preferences for Developing Countries," Working Papers 2006:4, Lund University, Department of Economics, revised 26 Jun 2006.
  12. 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.
  13. Baldwin, Richard & Taglioni, Daria, 2006. "Gravity for Dummies and Dummies for Gravity Equations," CEPR Discussion Papers 5850, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  14. Joakim Westerlund & Fredrik Wilhelmsson, 2009. "Estimating the gravity model without gravity using panel data," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(6), pages 641-649.
  15. Shang-Jin Wei & Arvind Subramanian, 2003. "The WTO Promotes Trade, Strongly But Unevenly," IMF Working Papers 03/185, International Monetary Fund.
  16. Hans P. Lankes & Katerina Alexandraki, 2004. "The Impact of Preference Erosionon Middle-Income Developing Countries," IMF Working Papers 04/169, International Monetary Fund.
  17. Boriss Siliverstovs & Dieter Schumacher, 2007. "Estimating Gravity Equations: To Log or Not to Log?," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 739, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
  18. Ozden, Caglar & Reinhardt, Eric, 2005. "The perversity of preferences: GSP and developing country trade policies, 1976-2000," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 1-21, October.
  19. Grossman, Gene M, 1982. "Import Competition from Developed and Developing Countries," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 64(2), pages 271-81, May.
  20. Debapriya Bhattacharya & Mustafizur Rahman, 2000. "Regional Cumulation Facility Under Ec-Gsp:Strategic Response From Short And Medium Term Perspectives," CPD Working Paper 9, Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD).
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:reviec:v:19:y:2011:i:4:p:763-775. 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: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)

or (Christopher F. Baum)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.