IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/wbecrv/v20y2006i2p217-240.html

Trade Preferences to Small Developing Countries and the Welfare Costs of Lost Multilateral Liberalization

Author

Listed:
  • Nuno Limão
  • Marcelo Olarreaga

Abstract

The proliferation of preferential trade liberalization over the last 20 years has raised the question of whether it slows multilateral trade liberalization. Recent theoretical and empirical evidence indicates that this is the case even for unilateral preferences that developed countries provide to small and poor countries, but there is no estimate of the resulting welfare costs. This stumbling block effect can be avoided by replacing the unilateral preferences with a fixed import subsidy, which generates a Pareto improvement. More importantly, this paper presents the first estimates of the welfare cost of preferential liberalization as a stumbling block to multilateral liberalization. Recent estimates of the stumbling block effect of preferences with data for 170 countries and more than 5,000 products are used to calculate the welfare effects of the European Union, Japan, and the United States switching from unilateral preferences for least developed countries to an import subsidy scheme. In a model with no dynamic gains to trade, the switch produces an annual net welfare gain for the 170 countries that adds about 10 percent to the estimated trade liberalization gains in the Doha Round. It also generates gains for each group: the European Union, Japan, and the United States ($2,934 million), least developed countries ($520 million), and the rest of the world ($900 million). Copyright 2006, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Nuno Limão & Marcelo Olarreaga, 2006. "Trade Preferences to Small Developing Countries and the Welfare Costs of Lost Multilateral Liberalization," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 20(2), pages 217-240.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:wbecrv:v:20:y:2006:i:2:p:217-240
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Arne Melchior, 2006. "The Most and the Least Favoured Nations: Norway's Trade Policy in Perspective," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(10), pages 1329-1346, October.
    2. Joseph Francois & Bernard Hoekman & Miriam Manchin, 2006. "Preference Erosion and Multilateral Trade Liberalization," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 20(2), pages 197-216.
    3. Baybars Karacaovali & Nuno Limão, 2018. "The clash of liberalizations: Preferential vs. multilateral trade liberalization in the European Union," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Policy Externalities and International Trade Agreements, chapter 14, pages 373-401, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Karacaovali, Baybars & Limao, Nuno, 2005. "The clash of liberalizations : preferential versus multilateral trade liberalization in the European Union," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3493, The World Bank.
    5. Shearer, Matthew & Suominen, Kati & Estevadeordal, Antoni, 2009. "Multilateralising RTAs in the Americas: State of Play and Ways Forward," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 2522, Inter-American Development Bank.
    6. Silva, Peri, 2011. "The role of importers and exporters in the determination of the U.S. tariff preferences granted to Latin America," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 207-219, March.
    7. United Nations ESCAP (ed.), 2011. "Trade beyond Doha: Prospects for Asia-Pacific Least Developed Countries, Studies in Trade and Investment 76," STUDIES IN TRADE AND INVESTMENT, United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), number tipub2625, January-j.
    8. Dowlah Caf, 2008. "The Generalized System of Preferences of the United States: Does It Promote Industrialization and Economic Growth in Least Developed Countries?," The Law and Development Review, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 74-97, December.
    9. Persson, Maria, 2012. "From trade preferences to trade facilitation: Taking stock of the issues," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy, vol. 6, pages 1-33.
    10. Antoni Estevadeordal & Matthew Shearer & Kati Suominen, 2011. "Regional Integration in the Americas: State of Play, Lessons, and Ways Forward," ADBI Working Papers 277, Asian Development Bank Institute.
    11. Will Martin & Kym Anderson, 2006. "Agricultural Trade Reform and the Doha Development Agenda," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 6889, April.
    12. Kym Anderson, 2016. "Agricultural Trade, Policy Reforms, and Global Food Security," Palgrave Studies in Agricultural Economics and Food Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-137-46925-0, June.
    13. Persson, Maria, 2013. "Trade Preferences from a Policy Perspective," Working Papers 2013:3, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    14. Lawrence, Robert Z. & Rosito, Tatiana, 2006. "A New Compensation Mechanism for Preference Erosion in the Doha Round," Working Paper Series rwp06-044, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    15. Mohamed Hedi Bchir & Stephen N. Karingi & Andrew Mold & Patrick N. Osakwe & Mustapha Sadni Jallab, 2007. "The Doha development round and Africa: partial and general equilibrium analyses of tariff preference erosion," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 37(s1), pages 287-295, December.
    16. Lawrence, Robert Z. & Rosito, Tatiana, 2006. "A New Compensation Mechanism for Preference Erosion in the Doha Round," Working Paper Series rwp06-044, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    17. Bob Fisher, 2006. "Preference Erosion, Government Revenues and Non‐tariff Trade Barriers," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(10), pages 1377-1393, October.
    18. Kazi Mahmudur Rahman & Hasanuzzaman, 2008. "United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) XII: Outcomes and Subsequent Priorities for Bangladesh and other LDCs," CPD Working Paper 69, Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD).
    19. Ketterer, Tobias D. & Bernhofen, Daniel M. & Milner, Chris, 2015. "The impact of trade preferences on multilateral tariff cuts: Evidence for Japan," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 31-51.
    20. Hoekman. Bernard & Prowse, Susan, 2005. "Economic policy responses to preference erosion : from trade as aid toaid for trade," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3721, The World Bank.
    21. Matthew Shearer & Kati Suominen & Antoni Estevadeordal, 2009. "Multilateralising RTAs in the Americas: State of Play and Ways Forward," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 9300, Inter-American Development Bank.
    22. Nuno Limão, 2016. "Preferential Trade Agreements," NBER Working Papers 22138, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    23. Bureau, Jean-Christophe & Chakir, Raja & Gallezot, Jacques, 2006. "The Utilisation of EU and US Trade Preferences for Developing Countries in the Agri-Food Sector," Working Papers 18867, TRADEAG - Agricultural Trade Agreements.
    24. Carlos A. Primo Braga & Bernard Hoekman & Will Martin, 2009. "Trade Preference Erosion : Measurement and Policy Response," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 9437, April.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D78 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Positive Analysis of Policy Formulation and Implementation
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F14 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Empirical Studies of Trade
    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration

    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:oup:wbecrv:v:20:y:2006:i:2:p:217-240. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wrldbus.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.