IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/rrorus/v10y2020i2d10.1134_s2079970520020069.html

Interaction of the Russian Far East and Asia-Pacific Countries: Assessment of Institutional and Tariff Barriers to Trade

Author

Listed:
  • D. A. Izotov

    (Institute for Economic Research, Far Eastern Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences)

  • K. I. Tochkov

    (Department of Economics, Texas Christian University)

Abstract

Due to the considerable distances from the major sales markets of Russia, the Far East has close ties with markets of the countries in the Asian-Pacific region (APR). The current expansion of trade and economic interactions with these countries has a positive effect on the economic development of the Far East. Reducing various barriers to trade with the APR countries can increase the scale of bilateral trade, acting as a source of growth and development for the economy of the Far East. To determine the ranges for increasing trade, the potential for trade interactions arising from the leveling of various barriers was quantified. It is shown that for the Far East a gradual change in the intensity of foreign trade relations was observed in favor of geographically close foreign markets, the Asia-Pacific countries. Based on the constructed gravity dependence, trade barriers for interactions between the Far East and Asia-Pacific countries were estimated and decomposed into the ad valorem equivalent. It was determined that the major source of tariff barriers was the tariff burden on exports and imports, formed by the Russian side. The decomposition assessment showed that the comparative institutional barriers between the Far East and the Asia-Pacific countries were significantly greater than the comparative tariff barriers. This circumstance indicated the insufficiency of reducing tariff barriers for intensifying the bilateral trade between the Far East and the Asia-Pacific countries. The analysis made it possible to assume that the introduction of various types of weakly motivated trade restrictions by the Russian side led to a shift in the customs burden from tariff barriers to institutional ones. In addition to the Republic of Korea, a general vector of intensification of trade between the Far East and the Asia-Pacific countries was observed for China. The estimates obtained suggest that the comparative institutional barriers between the Far Eastern regions and China will continue to decline. It is shown that the leveling of comparative institutional barriers between the Far East and Japan can significantly increase trade interactions between the Russian macroregion and the APR market.

Suggested Citation

  • D. A. Izotov & K. I. Tochkov, 2020. "Interaction of the Russian Far East and Asia-Pacific Countries: Assessment of Institutional and Tariff Barriers to Trade," Regional Research of Russia, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 182-193, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:rrorus:v:10:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1134_s2079970520020069
    DOI: 10.1134/S2079970520020069
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1134/S2079970520020069
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1134/S2079970520020069?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baier, Scott L. & Bergstrand, Jeffrey H., 2009. "Bonus vetus OLS: A simple method for approximating international trade-cost effects using the gravity equation," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 77-85, February.
    2. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2003. "Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to the Border Puzzle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 170-192, March.
    3. Leamer, Edward E. & Levinsohn, James, 1995. "International trade theory: The evidence," Handbook of International Economics, in: G. M. Grossman & K. Rogoff (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 26, pages 1339-1394, Elsevier.
    4. Keith Head & John Ries, 2001. "Increasing Returns versus National Product Differentiation as an Explanation for the Pattern of U.S.-Canada Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 858-876, September.
    5. Richard Baldwin & Daria Taglioni, 2006. "Gravity for Dummies and Dummies for Gravity Equations," NBER Working Papers 12516, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. María Pía Olivero & Yoto V. Yotov, 2012. "Dynamic gravity: endogenous country size and asset accumulation," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(1), pages 64-92, February.
    7. Andrey Kaukin & Georgy Idrisov, 2014. "The Gravity Model Of Russia’S International Trade: The Case Of A Large Country With A Long Border," Working Papers 0088, Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy, revised 2014.
    8. Parsley, David C. & Wei, Shang-Jin, 2001. "Explaining the border effect: the role of exchange rate variability, shipping costs, and geography," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 87-105, October.
    9. Hummels, David & Lugovskyy, Volodymyr & Skiba, Alexandre, 2009. "The trade reducing effects of market power in international shipping," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 84-97, May.
    10. Sébastien Miroudot & Enrico Pinali & Nicolas Sauter, 2007. "The Impact of Pro-Competitive Reforms on Trade in Developing Countries," OECD Trade Policy Papers 54, OECD Publishing.
    11. David L. Hummels & Georg Schaur, 2013. "Time as a Trade Barrier," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(7), pages 2935-2959, December.
    12. Hiau Looi Kee & Alessandro Nicita & Marcelo Olarreaga, 2009. "Estimating Trade Restrictiveness Indices," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(534), pages 172-199, January.
    13. Costas Arkolakis & Arnaud Costinot & Andres Rodriguez-Clare, 2012. "New Trade Models, Same Old Gains?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(1), pages 94-130, February.
    14. McCallum, John, 1995. "National Borders Matter: Canada-U.S. Regional Trade Patterns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(3), pages 615-623, June.
    15. D. A. Izotov, 2017. "Liberalization of Russia’s trade with the European Union, BRICS, and Trans-Pacific Partnership countries," Studies on Russian Economic Development, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 338-345, May.
    16. De Benedictis Luca & Vicarelli Claudio, 2005. "Trade Potentials in Gravity Panel Data Models," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-33, September.
    17. Anderson, James E, 1979. "A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 106-116, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Dmitriy Aleksandrovich Izotov & Kiril I. Tochkov, 2019. "Interaction of the Russian Far East with the Countries of the Pacific Rim: Evaluating Institutional and Tariff Trade Barriers," Spatial Economics=Prostranstvennaya Ekonomika, Economic Research Institute, Far Eastern Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences (Khabarovsk, Russia), issue 3, pages 20-45.
    2. Yoto V. Yotov, 2024. "The evolution of structural gravity: The workhorse model of trade," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 42(4), pages 578-603, October.
    3. Maria Cipollina & Luca De Benedictis & Luca Salvatici & Claudio Vicarelli, 2016. "Policy Measurement And Multilateral Resistance In Gravity Models," Working Papers LuissLab 16130, Dipartimento di Economia e Finanza, LUISS Guido Carli.
    4. Head, Keith & Mayer, Thierry, 2014. "Gravity Equations: Workhorse,Toolkit, and Cookbook," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 131-195, Elsevier.
    5. Thomas Orliac, 2012. "The economics of trade facilitation [L'économie de la facilitation des échanges]," Sciences Po Economics Publications (main) tel-03681980, HAL.
    6. Chen, Natalie & Novy, Dennis, 2011. "Gravity, trade integration, and heterogeneity across industries," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 206-221.
    7. Scott L. Baier & Amanda Kerr & Yoto V. Yotov, 2018. "Gravity, distance, and international trade," Chapters, in: Bruce A. Blonigen & Wesley W. Wilson (ed.), Handbook of International Trade and Transportation, chapter 2, pages 15-78, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Pamela Smith & Xiangwen Kong, 2022. "Intellectual property rights and trade: The exceptional case of GMOs," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(3), pages 763-811, March.
    9. Felbermayr, Gabriel & Yotov, Yoto V., 2021. "From theory to policy with gravitas: A solution to the mystery of the excess trade balances," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    10. Tamaş Anca, 2020. "Why should the gravity model be taught in business education?," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Paradigm, vol. 14(1), pages 422-433, July.
    11. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/dambferfb7dfprc9m01g1j1k2 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Anna Golovko & Hasan Sahin, 2021. "Analysis of international trade integration of Eurasian countries: gravity model approach," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 11(3), pages 519-548, September.
    13. Zongo, Amara, 2021. "The impact of services trade restrictiveness on food trade," International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 71-94.
    14. Mario Larch & Yoto V. Yotov, 2016. "General Equilibrium Trade Policy Analysis with Structural Gravity," CESifo Working Paper Series 6020, CESifo.
    15. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2004. "Trade Costs," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(3), pages 691-751, September.
    16. Badi H. Baltagi & Peter Egger & Michael Pfaffermayr, 2014. "Panel Data Gravity Models of International Trade," CESifo Working Paper Series 4616, CESifo.
    17. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/dambferfb7dfprc9m01g1j1k2 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Wessel, Jan, 2019. "Evaluating the transport-mode-specific trade effects of different transport infrastructure types," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 42-57.
    19. Michel Fouquin & Jules Hugot, 2016. "Back to the Future: International Trade Costs and the Two Globalizations," Vniversitas Económica, Universidad Javeriana - Bogotá, vol. 0(0), pages 1-35.
    20. Costinot, Arnaud & Rodríguez-Clare, Andrés, 2014. "Trade Theory with Numbers: Quantifying the Consequences of Globalization," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 197-261, Elsevier.
    21. Kareem, Fatima Olanike & Martinez-Zarzoso, Inmaculada & Brümmer, Bernhard, 2016. "Fitting the Gravity Model when Zero Trade Flows are Frequent: a Comparison of Estimation Techniques using Africa's Trade Data," GlobalFood Discussion Papers 230588, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    22. Befus, Tanja & Brockmeier, Martina & Bektasoglu, Beyhan, 2012. "Comparing Gravity Model Specifications to Estimate NTBs Using the GTAP Framework," Conference papers 332178, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:spr:rrorus:v:10:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1134_s2079970520020069. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.