IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/332872.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Liberalizing global trade in Mode 5 services: how much is worth?

Author

Listed:
  • Antimiani, Alessandro
  • Cernat, Lucian

Abstract

As indicated in a series of recent papers, the growing role of embedded services in manufacturing exports ("services in boxes") led to a proposal for a new modality of exporting services (mode 5 services), beyond the four modes of supply envisaged in GATS. For the vast majority of WTO members, the significance of mode 5 services is considerable, both in exports and imports. Furthermore, mode 5 services activities are a main driving factor in the trade-jobs nexus, particularly in the new services areas poised to play a greater role as a result of technological progress. However, unlike traditional GATS services trade, mode 5 services "in boxes" pay tariffs. Against this background, the current paper estimates the global gains that could be achieved from liberalizing mode 5 services at multilateral level. Using the latest data available on the share of embedded services in goods exports, the paper uses a CGE model to simulate a global mode 5 liberalization scenario. The paper also tries to capture the interplay between mode 5 services trade and the growing importance of future technological developments (software, digitalisation, Internet of Things, etc). Our preliminary set of results show the relevance to deal with Mode 5 in trade agreements not just because of its positive impact on global trade flows but also for the growing content of domestic services in goods exports. In our scenarios, global trade increase for all countries and, at the same time, the domestic share of services embodied in goods increase. The economic impact of a mode 5 multilateral initiative is considerable and can build a platform for a more inclusive set of trade rules for both developed and developing countries interested in promoting synergies between international trade rules and technical progress. For the latter, Mode 5 is a strong opportunity for economic growth since it is a driver for pushing investments in human capital.

Suggested Citation

  • Antimiani, Alessandro & Cernat, Lucian, 2017. "Liberalizing global trade in Mode 5 services: how much is worth?," Conference papers 332872, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:332872
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/332872/files/8690.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hellwig, Martin & Irmen, Andreas, 1999. "Wage Growth, Productivity Growth, and the Evolution of Employment," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 99-86, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
    2. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/2adadp8ijs8ij8c4htsg0puqid is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Thierry Mayer & Marc J. Melitz & Gianmarco I. P. Ottaviano, 2021. "Product Mix and Firm Productivity Responses to Trade Competition," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 103(5), pages 874-891, December.
    4. Yvonne Wolfmayr, 2008. "Producer Services and Competitiveness of Manufacturing Exports," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 34225, April.
    5. Alessandro Antimiani & Valeria Costantini, 2013. "Trade performances and technology in the enlarged European Union," Journal of Economic Studies, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 40(3), pages 355-389, July.
    6. Magnus Lodefalk, 2014. "The role of services for manufacturing firm exports," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 150(1), pages 59-82, February.
    7. Ianchovichina, Elena & Robert McDougall, 2000. "Theoretical Structure of Dynamic GTAP," GTAP Technical Papers 480, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    8. James E. Anderson & J. Peter Neary, 2005. "Measuring the Restrictiveness of International Trade Policy," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262012200, April.
    9. Thomas W. Hertel & Terrie Walmsley & Ken Itakura, 2005. "Dynamic Effects Of The "New Age" Free Trade Agreement Between Japan And Singapore," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Philippa Dee & Michael Ferrantino (ed.), Quantitative Methods For Assessing The Effects Of Non-Tariff Measures And Trade Facilitation, chapter 18, pages 483-523, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    10. Thomas W. Hertel & Terrie Walmsley & Ken Itakura, 2005. "Dynamic Effects Of The "New Age" Free Trade Agreement Between Japan And Singapore," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Philippa Dee & Michael Ferrantino (ed.), Quantitative Methods For Assessing The Effects Of Non-Tariff Measures And Trade Facilitation, chapter 18, pages 483-523, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    11. Lucian Cernat & Nuno Sousa, 2016. "The Trade and Jobs Nexus in Europe: How Important Are Mode 5 Services Exports?," CESifo Forum, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 16(04), pages 65-67, January.
    12. Erwin Corong & Thomas Hertel & Robert McDougall & Marinos Tsigas & Dominique van der Mensbrugghe, 2017. "The Standard GTAP Model, version 7," Journal of Global Economic Analysis, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, vol. 2(1), pages 1-119, June.
    13. Cernat, Lucian & Kutlina-Dimitrova, Zornitsa, 2014. "Thinking in a box: A ‘mode 5’ approach to service trade," DG TRADE Chief Economist Notes 2014-1, Directorate General for Trade, European Commission.
    14. repec:wsr:ecbook:2008:i:i-009 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Carmen Díaz‐Mora & Erena García‐López & Belén González‐Díaz, 2022. "Bilateral servicification in global value chains and deep trade agreements," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(8), pages 2510-2531, August.
    2. Eduardo A. Haddad & Inácio F. Araújo, 2021. "The internal geography of services value‐added in exports: A Latin American perspective," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 100(3), pages 713-744, June.
    3. Cernat, Lucian & D'Andrea, Barbara & Liberatore, Antonella & Maurer, Andreas & Wettstein, Steen, 2018. "Towards a Global Data Set on Trade in Services By Sector and Mode of Supply," Conference papers 332924, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    4. Wettstein, Steen & Liberatore, Antonella & Magdeleine, Joscelyn & Maurer, Andreas, 2019. "A Global Trade In Services Data Set by Sector and by Mode of Supply (TISMOS)," Conference papers 333058, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    5. Asimakopoulos, Grigorios & Revilla, Antonio & Rodríguez, Alicia, 2023. "International R&D sourcing, innovation and firm age: The advantage of ‘born-international sourcers’," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).

    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. Wenxi Lu, 2018. "FDI, Service imports and Export development," School of Economics and Public Policy Working Papers 2018-05, University of Adelaide, School of Economics and Public Policy.
    2. Hertel, Thomas, 2013. "Global Applied General Equilibrium Analysis Using the Global Trade Analysis Project Framework," Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, in: Peter B. Dixon & Dale Jorgenson (ed.), Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 815-876, Elsevier.
    3. Itakura, Ken & Hertel, Thomas & Jeff Reimer, 2003. "The Contribution of Productivity Linkages to the General Equilibrium Analysis of Free Trade Agreements," GTAP Working Papers 1193, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    4. Cai, Songfeng & Zhang, Yaxiong & Meng, Bo, 2015. "Spillover effects of TTIP on BRICS economies : a dynamic GVC-based CGE model," IDE Discussion Papers 485, Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization(JETRO).
    5. Inmaculada Martínez-Zarzoso & Martina Vidovic & Anca M. Voicu, 2014. "EU-Accession Effects on Sectoral Trade: A Helpman-Melitz-Rubinstein Approach with Panel Data," CESifo Working Paper Series 4903, CESifo.
    6. Mohammad Amin & Jamal Haidar, 2014. "Trade facilitation and country size," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 1441-1466, December.
    7. Richard Pomfret & Uwe Kaufmann & Christopher Findlay, 2010. "Are Preferential Tariffs Utilized? Evidence from Australian Imports, 2000-9," School of Economics and Public Policy Working Papers 2010-13, University of Adelaide, School of Economics and Public Policy.
    8. Fugazza, Marco & Maur, Jean-Christophe, 2008. "Non-tariff barriers in CGE models: How useful for policy?," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 475-490.
    9. Nong, Duy & Warziniack, Travis & Countryman, Amanda M. & Grey-Avis, Erin, 2017. "Effects of a Melting Arctic on Risk of Invasive Species Spread," Conference papers 332828, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    10. 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.
    11. Karimi, Farzad & Tavakoli, Akbar, 2010. "The Analysis of Trade Integration and Business Cycles Synchronization with Emphasis on Regional Arrangements among OIC Nations," Conference papers 331992, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    12. Georges, Patrick & Mérette, Marcel, 2012. "Toward a North American Security Perimeter? Assessing the trade, FDI, and welfare impacts of liberalizing 9/11 security measures," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 2514-2526.
    13. Ayoki, Milton, 2017. "The Development Dimension of the WTO Agreement on Trade Facilitation," MPRA Paper 87299, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Díaz-Bonilla, Carolina, 2007. "Poverty and Income Distribution Under Different Factor Market Assumptions: A Macro-Micro Model," Conference papers 331625, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    15. Gouranga Gopal Das & Soamiely Andriamananjara, 2006. "Hub-and-Spokes Free Trade Agreements in the Presence of Technology Spillovers: An Application to the Western Hemisphere," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 142(1), pages 33-66, April.
    16. Y. H. Venus Lun & Jan Hoffmann, 2016. "Connectivity and trade relativity: the case of ASEAN," Journal of Shipping and Trade, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 1-13, December.
    17. Peter Walkenhorst & Tadashi Yasui, 2004. "Quantitative Assessment of the Benefits of Trade Facilitation," International Trade 0401008, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Langhammer, Rolf J. & Wößmann, Ludger, . "Erscheinungsformen regionaler Integrationsabkommen im weltwirtschaftlichen Ordnungsrahmen: Defizite und Dynamik," Chapters in Economics,, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    19. Susan Stone & Anna Strutt, 2010. "Transport Infrastructure and Trade Facilitation in the Greater Mekong Subregion," Chapters, in: Douglas H. Brooks & Susan F. Stone (ed.), Trade Facilitation and Regional Cooperation in Asia, chapter 5, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Ana Shohibul Manshur Al Ahmad, 2014. "ASEAN-India and ASEAN-Korea FTA: Global Trade Analysis Project," Economic Journal of Emerging Markets, Universitas Islam Indonesia, vol. 6(1), pages 56-67, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    International Relations/Trade;

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations

    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:pugtwp:332872. 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.