Production-weighted Estimates of Aggregate Protection in Rich Countries toward Developing Countries
A challenge in the development of aggregate indexes of trade protection is finding weights to put on various tariffs that a) reflect their importance to exporters and b) are not endogenous to the protection being measured. One common basis for weights is actual imports; but these, as is well-known, are endogenous. Various authors have worked to correct this endogeneity, but doing so is difficult in product areas where protection is both high and widespread. For this reason, I develop a new set of estimates of overall protection in rich countries with respect to developing ones that eschews import weights as much as possible in favor of weights based on the value of exporter’s total production in each product area. The results are generally much higher than those from the Bouët et al. (2004) “MAcMap” data set; there, weights are based on imports of large reference groups of countries. I conclude that product areas in which protection is high and widespread are systematically de-emphasized when using pure MAcMap weights to aggregate across major product groups. In particular, when gauging rich-country protection with respect to developing countries, agriculture is de-emphasized. I also develop estimates of trade-distorting subsidies by country and commodity and translate these into tariffequivalents with the methodology of Cline (2004) in order to estimate overall protection levels. Agricultural tariffs dominate subsidies in trade-distorting effect, and agricultural protection in turn dominates goods protection generally. Japan is most protective, largely because of rice tariffs near 900%, followed by Norway and Switzerland. Because of their greater reliance on agriculture, the poorest countries face higher trade barriers than wealthier developing countries, despite tariff preferences.
|Date of creation:||Aug 2005|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 2055 L Street NW, 5th Floor, Washington DC 20036|
Fax: 202.416.0750 |
Web page: http://www.cgdev.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.:
- Hiau LooiKee & Alessandro Nicita & Marcelo Olarreaga, 2009.
"Estimating Trade Restrictiveness Indices,"
Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(534), pages 172-199, 01.
- Kee, Hiau Looi & Nicita, Alessandro & Olarreaga, Marcelo, 2006. "Estimating Trade Restrictiveness Indices," CEPR Discussion Papers 5576, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Kee, Hiau Looi & Nicita, Alessandro & Olarreaga, Marcelo, 2006. "Estimating trade restrictiveness indices," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3840, The World Bank.
- Anderson, James E & Neary, J Peter, 1994. "Measuring the Restrictiveness of Trade Policy," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 8(2), pages 151-169, May.
- James E. Anderson & J. Peter Neary, 1993. "Measuring the restrictiveness of trade policy," Working Papers 199307, School of Economics, University College Dublin.
- J Anderson & J.P. Neary, 1994. "Measuring the Restrictiveness of Trade Policy," CEP Discussion Papers dp0186, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
- William Cline, 2002. "An Index of Industrial Country Trade Policy Toward Developing Countries," Working Papers 14, Center for Global Development. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cgd:wpaper:66. 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: (Publications Manager)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.