IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trade diversion under selective preferential market access


  • Ingo Borchert


The European Community (EC) operates a multi-layered GSP scheme in which different groups of developing countries are granted varying degrees of market access. This paper analyzes the question of trade diversion among different categories of beneficiary countries ensuing from the selectivity of preferential market access. Evidence from a disaggregated panel data analysis reveals sizable intra-developing country trade diversion. The losses for relatively disadvantaged countries in terms of forgone trade volume are estimated to range between about 2% to 20% of their total trade with the EC. The distortions are driven by highly substitutable, mostly labour-intensive commodities.

Suggested Citation

  • Ingo Borchert, 2009. "Trade diversion under selective preferential market access," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1390-1410, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:cje:issued:v:42:y:2009:i:4:p:1390-1410

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: Available to subscribers only. Alternative access through JSTOR and Ingenta.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Christian Broda & David E. Weinstein, 2006. "Globalization and the Gains From Variety," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 121(2), pages 541-585.
    2. Fukao, Kyoji & Okubo, Toshihiro & Stern, Robert M., 2003. "An econometric analysis of trade diversion under NAFTA," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 3-24, March.
    3. Lorand Bartels, 2003. "The WTO Enabling Clause and Positive Conditionality in the European Community's GSP Program," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 507-532, June.
    4. Keith Head & John Ries, 2001. "Increasing Returns versus National Product Differentiation as an Explanation for the Pattern of U.S.-Canada Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 858-876, September.
    5. John Romalis, 2007. "NAFTA's and CUSFTA's Impact on International Trade," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(3), pages 416-435, August.
    6. Karacaovali, Baybars & Limão, Nuno, 2008. "The clash of liberalizations: Preferential vs. multilateral trade liberalization in the European Union," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 299-327, March.
    7. André Sapir, 1981. "Trade benefits under the EEC generalized system of preferences," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/8290, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    8. David Hummels & Alexandre Skiba, 2004. "Shipping the Good Apples Out? An Empirical Confirmation of the Alchian-Allen Conjecture," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(6), pages 1384-1402, December.
    9. Hoekman, Bernard & Ozden, Caglar, 2005. "Trade preferences and differential treatment of developing countries : a selective survey," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3566, The World Bank.
    10. Amelia Santos-Paulino & A. P. Thirlwall, 2004. "The impact of trade liberalisation on exports, imports and the balance of payments of developing countries," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(493), pages 50-72, February.
    11. 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.
    12. Arvind Panagariya, 2003. "EU Preferential Trade Policies and Developing Countries," International Trade 0308014, EconWPA.
    13. Jon D. Haveman & Usha Nair-Reichert & Jerry G. Thursby, 2003. "How Effective are Trade Barriers? An Empirical Analysis of Trade Reduction, Diversion, and Compression," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(2), pages 480-485, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Maria Cipollina & David Laborde Debucquet & Luca Salvatici, 2017. "The tide that does not raise all boats: an assessment of EU preferential trade policies," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 153(1), pages 199-231, February.
    2. Emanuel Ornelas, 2016. "Special and Differential Treatment for Developing Countries," CESifo Working Paper Series 5823, CESifo Group Munich.
    3. Katerina Gradeva & Inmaculada Martínez-Zarzoso, 2009. "Trade as Aid: The Role of the EBA-Trade Preferences Regime in the Development Strategy," Ibero America Institute for Econ. Research (IAI) Discussion Papers 197, Ibero-America Institute for Economic Research.
    4. Persson, Maria, 2013. "Trade Preferences from a Policy Perspective," Working Papers 2013:3, Lund University, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration


    Access and download statistics


    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:cje:issued:v:42:y:2009:i:4:p:1390-1410. 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: (Prof. Werner Antweiler). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.