IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/fip/fedder/y2000iq1p29-39.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring the benefits of unilateral trade liberalization; part 2: dynamic models

Author

Listed:
  • Carlos E. J. M. Zarazaga

Abstract

This is the second of two articles examining the potential welfare gains or losses from a unilateral move toward free trade. Part 1 concluded that applied static models of international trade fail to produce eye-popping positive welfare effects. In Part 2, Carlos Zarazaga reviews available applied dynamic general equilibrium models. He finds that the promises of larger welfare gains from unilateral trade liberalization do materialize in some dynamic models. However, other models cannot completely dismiss some common objections to the adoption of unilateral free trade policies. Zarazaga also identifies the controversial theoretical and empirical issues behind those objections that will have to be resolved before unilateral trade liberalization is accepted as the definitive, welfare-improving alternative to costly and prolonged multilateral trade agreements.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlos E. J. M. Zarazaga, 2000. "Measuring the benefits of unilateral trade liberalization; part 2: dynamic models," Economic and Financial Policy Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Q1, pages 29-39.
  • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedder:y:2000:i:q1:p:29-39
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.dallasfed.org/assets/documents/research/efr/2000/efr0001c.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dixit, Avinash K & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1977. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 297-308, June.
    2. Robert J. Barro & Paul Romer, 1993. "Economic Growth," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number barr93-1, April.
      • Robert J. Barro & Paul M. Romer, 1991. "Economic Growth," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number barr91-1.
    3. Feenstra, Robert C., 1986. "Functional equivalence between liquidity costs and the utility of money," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 271-291, March.
    4. Lawrence H. Goulder & Barry Eichengreen, 1992. "Trade Liberalization in General Equilibrium: Intertemporal and Inter-industry Effects," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 25(2), pages 253-280, May.
    5. Mendoza, Enrique G, 1991. "Real Business Cycles in a Small Open Economy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(4), pages 797-818, September.
    6. Keuschnigg, Christian & Kohler, Wilhelm, 1996. "Commercial policy and dynamic adjustment under monopolistic competition," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(3-4), pages 373-409, May.
    7. Ethier, Wilfred J, 1982. "National and International Returns to Scale in the Modern Theory of International Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 389-405, June.
    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. Arce, Rafael de & Mahia, Ramón, 2004. "Estimación Analítica de los efectos de la creación de un área de libre comercio agrícola entre la UE y Marruecos
      [Analytical estimation of EU - Morocco potential free agricultural trade area]
      ," MPRA Paper 10457, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Arce, Rafael de & Mahia, Ramón, 2003. "Un Modèle d’Equilibre pour la Determination des Effets Nationaux de la Creation d’une Zone de Libre Echange Agricole Euro-Mediterraneenne
      [An equilibrium model for Free Trade Area creation economic
      ," MPRA Paper 10455, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Acharya, Sanjaya, 2011. "Making unilateral trade liberalisation beneficial to the poor," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 60-71, June.

    More about this item

    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:2000:i:q1:p:29-39. 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: (Amy Chapman). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/frbdaus.html .

    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.