IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/332528.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Impact Analysis of TTIP on BRICs—based on dynamic GTAP model considering GVC

Author

Listed:
  • Songfeng, Cai
  • Yaxiong, Zhang
  • Bo, Meng

Abstract

Within the global value chain (GVC), the intermediate inputs of the products in one country come from various countries around the world, the imported products consumed in domestic may also include the domestic intermediate inputs. Therefore, it is very important to reflect this GVC characteristic when Using GTAP (Global Trade Analysis Project) model to analyze the trade policy. Because of the lack of necessary data, the armington assumption of trade linkage is implemented in two levels in the GTAP model: producers and consumers distinguish the domestic variety of a good from its imported variety without regard to the country of origin of the imported input; the sourcing of imported goods is placed at the border of an economy. In order to improve this common approach which simplifies the import decision at the border level, we introduce the WIOD(World Input-Output Database)with a micro-based determination of bilateral trade to place the sourcing of imports at the agent level. In this study, we use the improved dynamic GTAP model (we call it GTAP-GVC model) to assess the economy-wide impact of TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership) on BRICs. In the simulation, we mainly do the work in two aspects. Firstly, we reduce both tariff and non-tariff barriers (NTBs) between US and EU. Because average tariff levels on both sides of the Atlantic are relatively low already, various non-tariff barriers or NTBs (often in the form of domestic regulations) on both sides of the Atlantic constitute important impediments to deepening transatlantic trade linkages. For quantification of NTBs, this study has adopted the equivalent tariff levels of NTBs from the research results of Ecorys (2009) to capture the impact of removing NTBs. Secondly, the simulations that are carried out also take into account two sets of possible spillover effects beyond bilateral liberalization. These are defined as follows. First, we have included direct spillover. It is based on the assumption that improved regulatory conditions negotiated between the EU and the US will also result in a limited fall in related trade costs for third countries exporting to the EU and US. A second indirect effect involving third countries is considered as well: the indirect spillover. It means to gauge the economic implications if third countries adopt some of the common standards agreed between the EU and the US.

Suggested Citation

  • Songfeng, Cai & Yaxiong, Zhang & Bo, Meng, 2014. "The Impact Analysis of TTIP on BRICs—based on dynamic GTAP model considering GVC," Conference papers 332528, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:332528
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/332528/files/7072.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pierre‐Guillaume Méon & Khalid Sekkat, 2008. "Institutional Quality And Trade: Which Institutions? Which Trade?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 46(2), pages 227-240, April.
    2. Lassana Cissokho & Jonathan Haughton & Kossi Makpayo & Abdoulaye Seck, 2013. "Why Is Agricultural Trade within ECOWAS So High?," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies, vol. 22(1), pages 22-51, January.
    3. Asiedu, Elizabeth & Lien, Donald, 2011. "Democracy, foreign direct investment and natural resources," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 99-111, May.
    4. Yongzheng Yang & Sanjeev Gupta, 2007. "Regional Trade Arrangements in Africa: Past Performance and the Way Forward," African Development Review, African Development Bank, vol. 19(3), pages 399-431.
    5. Elizabeth Asiedu, 2006. "Foreign Direct Investment in Africa: The Role of Natural Resources, Market Size, Government Policy, Institutions and Political Instability," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 63-77, January.
    6. Kennedy K. Mbekeani, 2010. "Infrastructure, Trade Expansion and Regional Integration: Global Experience and Lessons for Africa-super- †," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies, vol. 19(suppl_1), pages 88-113.
    7. Arvind Subramanian & Natalia T. Tamirisa, 2003. "Is Africa Integrated in the Global Economy?," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 50(3), pages 1-2.
    8. Kaufmann, Daniel & Kraay, Aart & Mastruzzi, Massimo, 2010. "The worldwide governance indicators : methodology and analytical issues," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5430, The World Bank.
    9. Augustin Kwasi Fosu, 2011. "Terms of Trade and Growth of Resource Economies: A Tale of Two Countries," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2011-028, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    10. Roberto Longo & Khalid Sekkat, 2001. "Obstacles to Expanding Intra-African Trade," OECD Development Centre Working Papers 169, OECD Publishing.
    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. Ibukun Beecroft & Evans S. Osabuohien & Uchenna R. Efobi & Isaiah Olurinola & Romanus A. Osabohien, 2019. "Manufacturing Export and ICT Infrastructure in West Africa: Investigating the Roles of Economic and Political Institutions," Working Papers 19/098, European Xtramile Centre of African Studies (EXCAS).
    2. Uchenna Efobi & Simplice Asongu & Ibukun Beecroft, 2018. "Aid, Terrorism, and Foreign Direct Investment: Empirical Insight Conditioned on Corruption Control," International Economic Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(4), pages 610-630, October.
    3. Uchenna R. Efobi & Simplice A. Asongu & Ibukun Beecroft, 2015. "Foreign Direct Investment, Aid and Terrorism: Empirical Insight Conditioned on Corruption Control," Research Africa Network Working Papers 15/007, Research Africa Network (RAN).
    4. Issaka Dialga, 2017. "Changing the Africa's impoverishing economic model: Towards a rewarding sustainable specialization model with a new factor of production," Working Papers halshs-01500431, HAL.
    5. Sèna Kimm Gnangnon, 2022. "Aid for Trade, export product diversification, and foreign direct investment," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(1), pages 534-561, February.
    6. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2019. "Trade Policy Space and Foreign Direct Investment Inflows," EconStor Preprints 196149, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    7. Evans Stephen Osabuohien & Uchenna Rapuluchukwu Efobi, 2013. "Africa's Money in Africa," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 81(2), pages 292-306, June.
    8. Fon, Roger & Alon, Ilan, 2022. "Governance, foreign aid, and Chinese foreign direct investment," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113678, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Akhtaruzzaman, Muhammad & Berg, Nathan & Lien, Donald, 2017. "Confucius Institutes and FDI flows from China to Africa," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 241-252.
    10. Godwin Okafor & Jenifer Piesse & Allan Webster, 2017. "FDI Determinants in Least Recipient Regions: The Case of Sub†Saharan Africa and MENA," African Development Review, African Development Bank, vol. 29(4), pages 589-600, December.
    11. Badeeb, Ramez Abubakr & Lean, Hooi Hooi & Clark, Jeremy, 2017. "The evolution of the natural resource curse thesis: A critical literature survey," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 123-134.
    12. Simplice A. Asongu & Uchenna R. Efobi & Ibukun Beecroft, 2021. "Aid in Modulating the Impact of Terrorism on FDI: No Positive Thresholds, No Policy," Forum for Social Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(4), pages 432-456, October.
    13. Arief Bustaman & Rina Indiastuti & B. Budiono & Titik Anas, 2022. "Quality of Indonesia’s domestic institutions and export performance in the era of global value chains," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 11(1), pages 1-29, December.
    14. Federico Carril-Caccia & Juliette Milgram-Baleix & Jordi Paniagua, 2019. "Foreign Direct Investment in oil-abundant countries: The role of institutions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-23, April.
    15. Sèna Kimm Gnangnon, 2020. "Trade Openness and Diversification of External Financial Flows for Development: An Empirical Analysis," South Asian Journal of Macroeconomics and Public Finance, , vol. 9(1), pages 22-57, June.
    16. Simplice Asongu & Enowbi Batuo & Vanessa Tchamyou, 2015. "Bundling Governance: Finance versus Institutions in Private Investment Promotion," Working Papers of the African Governance and Development Institute. 15/051, African Governance and Development Institute..
    17. Philipp Harms & Pierre-Guillaume Méon, 2013. "The Composition of FDI in the MENA Region and Other Countries: Econometric Investigation and Implications for MENA Countries," Working Papers 793, Economic Research Forum, revised Nov 2013.
    18. Álvarez, Inmaculada C. & Barbero, Javier & Rodríguez-Pose, Andrés & Zofío, José L., 2018. "Does Institutional Quality Matter for Trade? Institutional Conditions in a Sectoral Trade Framework," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 72-87.
    19. Morrissey, Oliver & Udomkerdmongkol, Manop, 2012. "Governance, Private Investment and Foreign Direct Investment in Developing Countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 437-445.
    20. Asongu, Simplice & Nwachukwu, Jacinta, 2015. "Drivers of FDI in Fast Growing Developing Countries: Evidence from Bundling and Unbundling Governance," MPRA Paper 67294, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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:pugtwp:332528. 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/gtpurus.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.