Continental Trading Blocs: Are They Natural or Supernatural?
In: The Regionalization of the World Economy
Using the gravity model, we find evidence of three continental trading blocs: the Americas, Europe and Pacific Asia. Intra-regional trade exceeds what can be explained by the proximity of a pair of countries, their sizes and GNP/capitas, and whether they share a common border or language. We then turn from the econometrics to the economic welfare implications. Krugman has supplied an argument against a three-bloc world, assuming no transport costs, and another argument in favor, assuming prohibitively high transportation costs between continents. We complete the model for the realistic case where intercontinental transport costs are neither prohibitive nor zero. If transport costs are low, continental Free Trade Areas can reduce welfare. We call such blocs super-natural. Partial liberalization is better than full liberalization within regional Preferential Trading Arrangements, despite the GATT's Article 24. The super-natural zone occurs when the regionalization of trade policy exceeds what is justified by natural factors. Estimates suggest that trading blocs like the current EC are super-natural.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
|This chapter was published in: ||This item is provided by National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc in its series NBER Chapters with number
7821.||Handle:|| RePEc:nbr:nberch:7821||Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://www.nber.org
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- C. Fred Bergsten, 1991. "Commentary: the move toward free trade zones," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, issue Nov, pages 27-35.
- Wang, Zhen Kun & Winters, L. Alan, 1991.
"The Trading Potential of Eastern Europe,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
610, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Helpman, Elhanan, 1987. "Imperfect competition and international trade: Evidence from fourteen industrial countries," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 62-81, March.
- Jeffrey A. Frankel and Shang-Jin Wei., 1993.
"Emerging Currency Blocs,"
Center for International and Development Economics Research (CIDER) Working Papers
C93-026, University of California at Berkeley.
- Bhagwati, Jagdish N, 1971. "Trade-Diverting Customs Unions and Welfare Improvement: a Clarification," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 81(323), pages 580-87, September.
- Jeffrey A. Frankel, 1992.
"Is Japan creating a yen bloc in East Asia and the Pacific?,"
Pacific Basin Working Paper Series
92-09, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
- Jeffrey A. Frankel, 1993. "Is Japan Creating a Yen Bloc in East Asia and the Pacific?," NBER Chapters, in: Regionalism and Rivalry: Japan and the United States in Pacific Asia, pages 53-88 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Jeffrey A. Frankel., 1993. "Is Japan Creating a Yen Bloc in East Asia and the Pacific?," Center for International and Development Economics Research (CIDER) Working Papers C93-007, University of California at Berkeley.
- Jeffrey A. Frankel, 1992. "Is Japan Creating a Yen Bloc in East Asia and the Pacific?," NBER Working Papers 4050, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Richard Baldwin, 1993.
"A Domino Theory of Regionalism,"
NBER Working Papers
4465, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Krugman, Paul, 1980. "Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the Pattern of Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 950-59, December.
- Peter A. Petri, 1993. "The East Asian Trading Bloc: An Analytical History," NBER Chapters, in: Regionalism and Rivalry: Japan and the United States in Pacific Asia, pages 21-52 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Anderson, James E, 1979. "A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 106-16, March.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberch:7821. 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: ()
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.