IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

One size fits all? Accession to the internal market; an industry level assessment of EU enlargement

  • Richard Nahuis


Registered author(s):

Enlargement of the EU with ten Central and Eastern European Countries is a major item on the EU's policy agenda. Assessing the economic consequences of the accession to the internal market is not obvious. This paper provides a new method to quantify the impact of the accession. The assessment is based on a gravity-equation, estimated for 16 industries. The estimations exploit the fact that the current EU members already operate in a Single Market since 1992. The estimations provide information on the barriers, at the level of industries, that the Single Market program succeeded to remove. This is used to assess the industry-level impact of enlargement, for the current EU members and for the accession countries. This approach yields different estimates for the impact of accession to the internal market for the different industries and different countries. The impact of accession to the internal market is notably large in Agriculture, Textiles, Trade Services, Transport Equipment, Non-metallic Minerals and Food Processing. Moreover, the aggregate excess trade within the internal market is comparable to what other studies find. The shock of accession to the internal market is plausibly largest for the accession countries. For the current members of the EU the upcoming enlargement likely has the largest impact for Austria, Greece and Germany.

To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

Paper provided by CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis in its series CPB Discussion Paper with number 14.

in new window

Date of creation: Oct 2002
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cpb:discus:14
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Postbus 80510, 2508 GM Den Haag

Phone: (070) 338 33 80
Fax: (070) 338 33 50
Web page:

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.:

as in new window
  1. John F. Helliwell, 1996. "Do National Borders Matter for Quebec's Trade?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 29(3), pages 507-22, August.
  2. Fidrmuc, Jarko & Fidrmuc, Jan, 2000. "Integration, disintegration and trade in Europe: Evolution of trade relations during the 1990s," ZEI Working Papers B 03-2000, University of Bonn, ZEI - Center for European Integration Studies.
  3. 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;CES;MSH, vol. 12(24), pages 125-176, 04.
  4. Tamim Bayoumi & Barry Eichengreen, 1995. "Is Regionalism Simply a Diversion? Evidence From the Evolution of the EC and EFTA," NBER Working Papers 5283, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. McCallum, John, 1995. "National Borders Matter: Canada-U.S. Regional Trade Patterns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(3), pages 615-23, June.
  6. Jeffrey A. Frankel & Andrew K. Rose, 2000. "Estimating the Effect of Currency Unions on Trade and Output," NBER Working Papers 7857, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  7. 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.
  8. Soloaga, Isidro & Winters, L. Alan, 1999. "Regionalism in the Nineties: What Effect on Trade?," CEPR Discussion Papers 2183, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  9. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2003. "Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to the Border Puzzle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 170-192, March.
  10. Alan V. Deardorff, 1995. "Determinants of Bilateral Trade: Does Gravity Work in a Neoclassical World?," NBER Working Papers 5377, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  11. Christian Keuschnigg & Mirela Keuschnigg & Wilhelm Kohler, 2001. "The German Perspective on Eastern EU Enlargement," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(4), pages 513-542, 04.
  12. Keith Head & John Ries, 2001. "Increasing Returns versus National Product Differentiation as an Explanation for the Pattern of U.S.-Canada Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 858-876, September.
  13. Barry Eichengreen & Douglas A. Irwin, 1996. "The Role of History in Bilateral Trade Flows," NBER Working Papers 5565, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  14. Hummels, David, 1999. "Toward a Geography of Trade Costs," GTAP Working Papers 1162, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cpb:discus:14. 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.