IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/fip/fedder/y1999iqiiip14-25.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring the benefits of unilateral trade liberalization, Part I: static models

Author

Listed:
  • Carlos E. Zarazaga

Abstract

Multilateral trade agreements generally require protracted and complicated negotiations. An obvious alternative is unilateral trade liberalization. However, would this simpler route toward free trade improve a country's welfare? This article, the first in a series of two, addresses this question using applied static models of international trade. The second article will examine the issue from the perspective of dynamic models. In the current article, Carlos Zarazaga discusses why static models fail to produce a clear-cut case in favor of unilateral trade liberalization. He points out, however, that static models that find unilateral free trade is harmful owe this negative conclusion to a common assumption-the national product ifferentiation assumption-whose empirical and theoretical foundations have not yet been convincingly substantiated.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlos E. Zarazaga, 1999. "Measuring the benefits of unilateral trade liberalization, Part I: static models," Economic and Financial Policy Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Q III, pages 14-25.
  • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedder:y:1999:i:qiii:p:14-25
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.dallasfed.org/~/media/documents/research/efr/1999/efr9903b.pdf
    File Function: Full Text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Harris, Richard, 1984. "Applied General Equilibrium Analysis of Small Open Economies with Scale Economies and Imperfect Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(5), pages 1016-1032, December.
    2. Robin W. Boadway & John M. Treddenick, 1978. "A General Equilibrium Computation of the Effects of the Canadian Tariff Structure," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 11(3), pages 424-446, August.
    3. Brown, Drusilla K., 1987. "Tariffs, the terms of trade, and national product differentiation," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 503-526.
    4. Shoven, John B & Whalley, John, 1984. "Applied General-Equilibrium Models of Taxation and International Trade: An Introduction and Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 22(3), pages 1007-1051, September.
    5. Krugman, Paul R., 1979. "Increasing returns, monopolistic competition, and international trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 469-479, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Arturo Pérez Mendoza, 2006. "Análisis del efecto económico de la aplicación de una medida de salvaguarda: el caso de la industria del triplay," Economía Mexicana NUEVA ÉPOCA, CIDE, División de Economía, vol. 0(1), pages 67-96, January-J.
    2. Cletus C. Coughlin, 2002. "The controversy over free trade: the gap between economists and the general public," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, vol. 84(Jan.), pages 1-22.

    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. Lewis, Jeffrey D. & Robinson, Sherman & Wang, Zhi, 1995. "Beyond the Uruguay Round: The implications of an Asian free trade area," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 35-90.
    2. Francois, Joseph, 1998. "Scale Economies and Imperfect Competition in the GTAP Model," GTAP Technical Papers 317, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    3. Hazledine, Tim, 1989. "Industrial Organisation Foundations Of Trade Policy Modelling," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 33(1), pages 1-19, April.
    4. Arvind Panagariya, 2003. "Alternative Approaches to Measuring the Cost of Protection," International Trade 0308002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Peter Lloyd & Xiao-guang Zhang, 2006. "The Armington Model," Staff Working Papers 0602, Productivity Commission, Government of Australia.
    6. J. David Richardson, 1989. "Empirical Research on Trade Liberalization With Imperfect Competition: A Survey," NBER Working Papers 2883, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Cororaton, Caesar B., 1994. "Structural Adjustment Policy Experiments: The Use of Philippine CGE Models," Discussion Papers DP 1994-03, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    8. James Markusen, 2023. "Incorporating Theory-Consistent Endogenous Markups into Applied General-Equilibrium Models," Journal of Global Economic Analysis, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, vol. 8(2), pages 60-99, December.
    9. Fullerton, Don & Metcalf, Gilbert E., 2002. "Tax incidence," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 26, pages 1787-1872, Elsevier.
    10. Christoph Boehringer & Edward Balistreri & Thomas Rutherford, 2018. "Quantifying Disruptive Trade Policies," Working Papers V-415-18, University of Oldenburg, Department of Economics, revised Nov 2018.
    11. Willenbockel, Dirk, 2004. "Specification choice and robustness in CGE trade policy analysis with imperfect competition," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 21(6), pages 1065-1099, December.
    12. Peichl, Andreas, 2008. "The benefits of linking CGE and Microsimulation Models - Evidence from a Flat Tax analysis," FiFo Discussion Papers - Finanzwissenschaftliche Diskussionsbeiträge 08-6, University of Cologne, FiFo Institute for Public Economics.
    13. Minor, Peter J., 2010. "Time as a Barrier to Trade: A GTAP Database of ad valorem Trade Time Costs," Conference papers 331960, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    14. Lukas Mohler, 2011. "Variety Gains from Trade in Switzerland," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 147(I), pages 45-70, March.
    15. Sabine Mage-Bertomeu, 2006. "Les modèles d'équilibre général appliqués à la politique commerciale : développements récents," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 116(3), pages 357-381.
    16. Krugman, Paul R., 1989. "Industrial organization and international trade," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 20, pages 1179-1223, Elsevier.
    17. De Souza Ferreira Filho, Joaquim Bento & Rocha, Marcelo Theoto, 2007. "Economic Evaluation of Public Policies Aiming the Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Brazil," Conference papers 331568, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    18. Kehoe, Timothy J., 2002. "An Evaluation of the Performance of Applied General Equilibrium Models of the Impact of NAFTA," Conference papers 331066, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    19. Schweinberger, Albert G, 1996. "Procompetitive Gains from Trade and Comparative Advantage," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 37(2), pages 361-375, May.
    20. Lee, Hiro & Roland-Holst, David, 1999. "Cooperation or Confrontation in U.S.-Japan Trade? Some General Equilibrium Estimates," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 119-139, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Trade;

    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:fip:fedder:y:1999:i:qiii:p:14-25. 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: Amy Chapman (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/frbdaus.html .

    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.