IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iaae06/25529.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Enlargement of Trade Blocs: National Welfare Effects If Trade Is Liberalized

Author

Listed:
  • Glebe, Thilo W.
  • Salhofer, Klaus

Abstract

Small countries may benefit from the formation of a trade bloc, since their combined market power will enable them to manipulate the terms of trade. The question of interest is whether countries will benefit from the enlargement of a trading bloc, if trade liberalization induces countries to substitute domestic support measures for conventional border protection. The paper deals with this question by analyzing the conditions for positive welfare effects resulting from the enlargement of a trade bloc. Based on a partial equilibrium trade model, we consider a game in production taxes/subsidies between two trade blocs. The tax/subsidy instrument may capture the production effect which can be induced by a combination of environmental, health or safety rules. The paper demonstrates that national welfare effects from the enlargement of a trading bloc depend crucially on a member country's net trade flow and the relative market power of the trade bloc. The theoretical analysis is supplemented by a numerical analysis estimating the potential welfare gains of EU enlargement on the major grain crop markets. Based on the scenarios that the EU operates either as a monopoly or competes with the rest of the world within a duopoly, upper and lower bounds of potential welfare effects resulting from enlargement are estimated. The results suggest that welfare effects on the major European grain markets are very small in proportion to the total production value. We thereby conclude that political reasons are likely to remain the main motivation for further EU enlargement.

Suggested Citation

  • Glebe, Thilo W. & Salhofer, Klaus, 2006. "Enlargement of Trade Blocs: National Welfare Effects If Trade Is Liberalized," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25529, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae06:25529
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.25529
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/25529/files/cp060294.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.25529?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sumner, Daniel A., 2000. "Domestic support and the WTO negotiations," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 44(3), pages 1-18.
    2. Herok, Claudia A. & Lotze, Hermann, 2000. "Implications of an EU Eastern Enlargement Under a New Common Agricultural Policy," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 22(6), pages 661-690, November.
    3. Hungerford, Thomas L., 1991. "GATT: A cooperative equilibrium in a noncooperative trading regime?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3-4), pages 357-369, November.
    4. Banse, M. & Twesten, H., 2001. "Wieviel verliert der Rest der Welt bei regionalen Handelksabkommen - eine Analyse alternativer Szenarien am Beispiel der EU-Osterweiterung," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 37.
    5. John Kennan & Raymond Riezman, 2013. "Do Big Countries Win Tariff Wars?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Raymond Riezman (ed.), International Trade Agreements and Political Economy, chapter 4, pages 45-51, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. S. E. Frandsen & H. G. Jensen & D. M. Vanzetti, 2000. "Expanding ‘Fortress Europe’: Agricultural Trade and Welfare Implications of European Enlargement for Non‐member Regions," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 309-329, March.
    7. Harry G. Johnson, 1953. "Optimum Tariffs and Retaliation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 21(2), pages 142-153.
    8. Nahuis, Richard, 2004. "One size fits all?: Accession to the internal market; an industry-level assessment of EU enlargement," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 571-586, July.
    9. David Blandford & Richard N. Boisvert & Linda Fulponi, 2003. "Nontrade Concerns: Reconciling Domestic Policy Objectives with Freer Trade in Agricultural Products," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(3), pages 668-673.
    10. Rabinowicz, Ewa, 1999. "Redesigning the CAP to Meet the Challenges of EU Enlargement and the WTO: What Can Agricultural Economic Research Contribute?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 26(3), pages 265-281, August.
    11. Carsten Daugbjerg & Alan Swinbank, 2004. "The CAP and EU Enlargement: Prospects for an Alternative Strategy to Avoid the Lock‐in of CAP Support," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(1), pages 99-119, February.
    12. Philip C. Abbott & Panu K. S. Kallio, 1996. "Implications of Game Theory for International Agricultural Trade," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(3), pages 738-744.
    13. Bond, Eric W. & Syropoulos, Constantinos, 1996. "The size of trading blocs Market power and world welfare effects," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(3-4), pages 411-437, May.
    14. Richard E. Baldwin & Joseph F. Francois & Richard Portes, 1997. "The costs and benefits of eastern enlargement: the impact on the EU and central Europe," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 12(24), pages 125-176.
    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. Glebe, Thilo W., 2009. "Enlargement of the European Union: A movement towards the optimal trade bloc size?," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 10(2), pages 1-10.
    2. Glebe, Thilo W., 2011. "Welfare economics of agricultural trade liberalisation and strategic environmental policy," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 8(2).
    3. Staiger, Robert W., 1995. "International rules and institutions for trade policy," Handbook of International Economics, in: G. M. Grossman & K. Rogoff (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 29, pages 1495-1551, Elsevier.
    4. Robert W. Staiger & Kyle Bagwell, 1999. "An Economic Theory of GATT," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 215-248, March.
    5. Chang, Winston W. & Chen, Tai-Liang & Saito, Tetsuya, 2021. "Formation of symmetric free-trade blocs, optimal tariff structure, and world welfare," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    6. Carsten Kowalczyk & Raymond Riezman, 2013. "Trade Agreements," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Daniel Bernhofen & Rod Falvey & David Greenaway & Udo Kreickemeier (ed.), Palgrave Handbook of International Trade, chapter 13, pages 367-388, Palgrave Macmillan.
    7. Chisik, Richard, 2003. "Gradualism in free trade agreements: a theoretical justification," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 367-397, March.
    8. Coates, Daniel E. & Ludema, Rodney D., 2001. "A theory of trade policy leadership," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 1-29, June.
    9. Weimin Zhang & Wangrong Ma & Qiwei Chen, 2022. "Does Regional Development Policy Promote Industrial Structure Upgrading? Evidence from the Yangtze River Delta in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-21, July.
    10. Carsten Kowalczyk & Raymond Riezman, 2013. "Free trade: what are the terms-of-trade effects?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Raymond Riezman (ed.), International Trade Agreements and Political Economy, chapter 10, pages 149-164, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    11. Götz, Christian & Heckelei, Thomas & Rudloff, Bettina, 2010. "What makes countries initiate WTO disputes on food-related issues?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 154-162, April.
    12. Kishore Gawande, 1997. "A Test of a Theory of Strategically Retaliatory Trade Barriers," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(2), pages 425-449, October.
    13. Valeria Costantini & Francesco Crespi, 2015. "European enlargement policy, technological capabilities and sectoral export dynamics," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 25-69, February.
    14. Zissimos, Ben, 2009. "Optimum tariffs and retaliation: How country numbers matter," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 276-286, July.
    15. Hideo Konishi & Carsten Kowalczyk & Tomas Sjostrom, 2003. "Free Trade, Customs Unions, and Transfers," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 568, Boston College Department of Economics.
    16. David J. Kuenzel, 2023. "Non‐tariff measures: What's tariffs got to do with it?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(1), pages 133-163, February.
    17. Fritz Breuss, 2004. "WTO Dispute Settlement: An Economic Analysis of Four EU–US Mini Trade Wars—A Survey," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 4(4), pages 275-315, December.
    18. Bagwell, Kyle & Staiger, Robert W., 2001. "Reciprocity, non-discrimination and preferential agreements in the multilateral trading system," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 281-325, June.
    19. Takumi Naito, 2021. "Can The Optimal Tariff Be Zero For A Growing Large Country?," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 62(3), pages 1237-1280, August.
    20. Jean-Marc Malambwe Kilolo, 2018. "An elementary model of export tax war," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 154(2), pages 307-325, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    International Relations/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:ags:iaae06:25529. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.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.