IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Services trade within Canada and the European Union; what do they have in common?

  • Arjan Lejour

    ()

  • J.W. de Paiva Verheijden

This paper explains bilateral services trade using a gravity equation and compares the results with trade in goods. We analyse bilateral trade between the provinces of Canada and between the member states of the European Union. We conclude that the gravity equation explains the variability in services trade very well: market size of the exporting and importing regions and distance are the most important explanatory variables. On average, distance is a less hindrance for services trade than for goods trade. Differences in languages and the regulation of product markets hamper services and goods trade in Europe significantly. Trade in services is also hampered by regulation in the importing country, but this is not true for goods. Services trade within Canada is twice as high as within Europe measured as share of GDP. Tentative estimates suggest that intra-EU services trade could be much higher if the internal market would function like the Canadian services market.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.cpb.nl/sites/default/files/publicaties/download/services-trade-within-canada-and-european-union-what-do-they-have-common.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis in its series CPB Discussion Paper with number 42.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Dec 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cpb:discus:42
Contact details of provider: Postal: Postbus 80510, 2508 GM Den Haag
Phone: (070) 338 33 80
Fax: (070) 338 33 50
Web page: http://www.cpb.nl/
Email:


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. Holger C. Wolf, 1997. "Patterns of Intra- and Inter-State Trade," NBER Working Papers 5939, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. Henri L.F. De Groot & Gert-Jan Linders & Piet Rietveld & Uma Subramanian, 2003. "The Institutional Determinants of Bilateral Trade Patterns," ERSA conference papers ersa03p421, European Regional Science Association.
  4. Henk Kox & Arjan Lejour & Raymond Montizaan, 2004. "The free movement of services within the EU," CPB Document 69, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
  5. Mayer, Thierry & Zignago, Soledad, 2006. "Notes on CEPII’s distances measures," MPRA Paper 26469, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  6. Keith Head & Thierry Mayer, 2000. "Non-Europe : The Magnitude and Causes of Market Fragmentation in the EU," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-00267441, HAL.
  7. Fukunari Kimura & Hyun-Hoon Lee, 2006. "The Gravity Equation in International Trade in Services," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, vol. 142(1), pages 92-121, April.
  8. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2004. "Trade Costs," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 593, Boston College Department of Economics.
  9. Thierry Mayer & Keith Head, 2002. "Illusory Border Effects: Distance Mismeasurement Inflates Estimates of Home Bias in Trade," Working Papers 2002-01, CEPII research center.
  10. John F. Helliwell & Geneviève Verdier, 2001. "Measuring internal trade distances: a new method applied to estimate provincial border effects in Canada," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 34(4), pages 1024-1041, November.
  11. Richard Nahuis, 2002. "One size fits all? Accession to the internal market; an industry level assessment of EU enlargement," CPB Discussion Paper 14, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
  12. Volker Nitsch, 2000. "National borders and international trade: evidence from the European Union," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 33(4), pages 1091-1105, November.
  13. Henk Kox & Arjan Lejour, 2004. "A different approach to WTO negotiations in services," CPB Discussion Paper 36, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
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:42. 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.