On Estimating the Static Effects of Preferential Tariffs
It is shown that the estimates of trade creation, trade diversion, and the erosion of GSP benefits derived from the well-known methodology of Robert Baldwin and Tracy Murray (1977) are biased for two reasons. First, the estimates neglect an intercommodity substitution and secondly, the estimates are based on free on board values of imports rather than the values actually paid by consumers in the donor country. Acknowledging these biases results in the overestimation of the aforementioned aggregate effects by 9 percent, 57 percent, and 54 percent respectively. The implicit own- and cross-price elasticities of demand of the corrected methodology are also reported.
Volume (Year): 13 (1987)
Issue (Month): 4 (Oct-Dec)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: c/o Dr. Alexandre Olbrecht, The Anisfield School of Business 205, Ramapo College, 505 Ramapo Valley Road, Ramapo, New Jersey 07430, USA|
Phone: (201) 684-7346
Web page: https://www.quinnipiac.edu/eea/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Baldwin, R E & Murray, Tracy, 1977. "MFN Tariff Reductions and Developing Country Trade Benefits under the GSP," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 87(345), pages 30-46, March.
- Ahmad, Jaleel, 1978. "Tokyo Rounds of Trade Negotiations and the Generalised System of Preferences," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 88(350), pages 285-295, June.
- Rousslang, Donald & Parker, Stephen, 1984. "Cross-Price Elasticities of U.S. Import Demand," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 66(3), pages 518-523, August.
- Pomfret, Richard, 1986. "MFN Tariff Reductions and Developing Country Trade Benefits under the GSP: A Comment," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 96(382), pages 534-536, June.
- Clague, Christopher, 1971. "Tariff Preferences and Separable Utility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 61(2), pages 188-194, May.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eej:eeconj:v:13:y:1987:i:4:p:389-397. 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: (Victor Matheson, College of the Holy Cross)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.