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

Trade liberalization and industrial concentration: Evidence from Brazil

  • Cavalcanti Ferreira, Pedro
  • Facchini, Giovanni

This paper applies an endogenous lobby formation model to explain the extent of trade protection granted to Brazilian manufacturing industries during the 1988- 1994 trade liberalization episode. Using a panel data set covering this period, we find that even in an environment in which a major regime shift has been introduced, more concentrated sectors have been able to obtain policy advantages, that lead to a reduction in international competition. The importance of industry structure appears to be substantial: In our baseline specification, an increase in concentration by 20% leads to an increase in protection by 5%-7%.

(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://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1062-9769(05)00026-8
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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 Elsevier in its journal The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance.

Volume (Year): 45 (2005)
Issue (Month): 2-3 (May)
Pages: 432-446

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:quaeco:v:45:y:2005:i:2-3:p:432-446
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/620167

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. Devashish Mitra, 1999. "Endogenous Lobby Formation and Endogenous Protection: A Long-Run Model of Trade Policy Determination," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1116-1134, December.
  2. Theo Eicher & Thomas Osang, 2002. "Protection for Sale: An Empirical Investigation: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1702-1710, December.
  3. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 1992. "Protection For Sale," NBER Working Papers 4149, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  4. Souza, Leonardo Rocha & Smith, Jeremy & Souza, Reinaldo Castro de, 2003. "Convex combinations of long memory estimates from different sampling rates," Economics Working Papers (Ensaios Economicos da EPGE) 489, FGV/EPGE Escola Brasileira de Economia e Finanças, Getulio Vargas Foundation (Brazil).
  5. Maggi, G & Rodriguez-Clare, A, 1996. "The Value of Trade Agreements in the Presence of Political Pressures," Papers 180, Princeton, Woodrow Wilson School - Public and International Affairs.
  6. Trefler, Daniel, 1993. "Trade Liberalization and the Theory of Endogenous Protection: An Econometric Study of U.S. Import Policy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(1), pages 138-60, February.
  7. Richard E. Caves, 1976. "Economic Models of Political Choice: Canada's Tariff Structure," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 9(2), pages 278-300, May.
  8. Pedro Cavalcanti Ferreira & JosÈ Luiz Rossi, 2003. "New Evidence from Brazil on Trade Liberalization and Productivity Growth," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 44(4), pages 1383-1405, November.
  9. Moreira, Humberto Ataíde & Costa, Cristiano Machado & Ferreira, Daniel Bernardo Soares, 2004. "Biased managers, organizational design, and incentive provision," Economics Working Papers (Ensaios Economicos da EPGE) 525, FGV/EPGE Escola Brasileira de Economia e Finanças, Getulio Vargas Foundation (Brazil).
  10. Magee, Christopher, 2002. "Endogenous trade policy and lobby formation: an application to the free-rider problem," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 449-471, August.
  11. Pecorino, Paul, 1998. "Is There a Free-Rider Problem in Lobbying? Endogenous Tariffs, Trigger Strategies, and the Number of Firms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(3), pages 652-60, June.
  12. Souza, Leonardo Rocha, 2003. "A note on Chambers's "long memory and aggregation in macroeconomic time series"," Economics Working Papers (Ensaios Economicos da EPGE) 503, FGV/EPGE Escola Brasileira de Economia e Finanças, Getulio Vargas Foundation (Brazil).
  13. Pabo Sanguinetti & Alok Bohara & Kishore Guatanabe, 2003. "Trade Diverion and Declinning Tariffs: Evidence from MERCOSUR," Department of Economics Working Papers 003, Universidad Torcuato Di Tella.
  14. M. Ali Khan & Tapan Mitra, 2005. "On choice of technique in the Robinson-Solow-Srinivasan model," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 1(2), pages 83-110.
  15. Terra, Maria Cristina T. & Valladares, Frederico Estrella Carneiro, 2003. "Real exchange rate misalignments," Economics Working Papers (Ensaios Economicos da EPGE) 493, FGV/EPGE Escola Brasileira de Economia e Finanças, Getulio Vargas Foundation (Brazil).
  16. Monteiro, Paulo Klinger & Araújo, Aloísio Pessoa de & Martins-da-Rocha, Victor Filipe, 2003. "Equilibria in security markets with a continuum of agents," Economics Working Papers (Ensaios Economicos da EPGE) 513, FGV/EPGE Escola Brasileira de Economia e Finanças, Getulio Vargas Foundation (Brazil).
  17. SM Helfand, 2000. "Interest Groups And Economic Policy: Explaining The Pattern Of Protection In The Brazilian Agricultural Sector," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 18(4), pages 462-476, October.
  18. Kishore Gawande & Usree Bandyopadhyay, 2000. "Is Protection for Sale? Evidence on the Grossman-Helpman Theory of Endogenous Protection," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 82(1), pages 139-152, February.
  19. Juliano Junqueira Assunção & Humberto Moreira, 2005. "Land taxes in a Latin American context," Textos para discussão 497, Department of Economics PUC-Rio (Brazil).
  20. Tsuchida, Marcos H. & Araújo, Aloísio Pessoa de & Moreira, Humberto Ataíde, 2004. "The trade-off between incentives and endogenous risk," Economics Working Papers (Ensaios Economicos da EPGE) 523, FGV/EPGE Escola Brasileira de Economia e Finanças, Getulio Vargas Foundation (Brazil).
  21. Olarreaga, Marcelo & Soloaga, Isidro, 1998. "Endogenous Tariff Formation: The Case of Mercosur," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 12(2), pages 297-320, May.
  22. Rodrik, Dani, 1986. "Tariffs, subsidies, and welfare with endogenous policy," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3-4), pages 285-299, November.
  23. Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg & Giovanni Maggi, 1997. "Protection for Sale: An Empirical Investigation," NBER Working Papers 5942, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  24. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G., 1993. "Estimation and Inference in Econometrics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195060119, May.
  25. Rodrik, Dani, 1995. "Political economy of trade policy," Handbook of International Economics, in: G. M. Grossman & K. Rogoff (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 28, pages 1457-1494 Elsevier.
  26. Neri, Marcelo Cortes & Soares, Wagner Lopes, 2003. "Idade, incapacidade e a inflação do número de pessoas com deficiência," Economics Working Papers (Ensaios Economicos da EPGE) 490, FGV/EPGE Escola Brasileira de Economia e Finanças, Getulio Vargas Foundation (Brazil).
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:eee:quaeco:v:45:y:2005:i:2-3:p:432-446. 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: (Zhang, Lei)

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.