IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Structural Gravity with Dummies Only

Listed author(s):
  • Egger, Peter
  • Nigai, Sergey

The measurement of trade costs and their effects on outcome is at the heart of a large quantitative literature in international economics. The majority of the recent significant contributions on the matter assumes that trade consists of a product of exporter-time-specific factors, importer-time-specific factors, and country-pair-time-specific trade costs, and that log trade costs are additively composed of a parameterized part and a residual part. We demonstrate that residual trade costs are relatively important and that the parameters on observable trade-cost measures as well as the structural country-time-specific variables or parameters are inevitably biased no matter of whether models are estimated by ordinary least-squares or by exponential-family models. The reason is that the country-specific variables are endogenous to the residual trade costs, regardless of whether they are captured by iteratively-solved structural terms or by country-time fixed effects. As a result, quantifications of effects of trade costs and comparative static results are also biased. Apart from diagnosing this problem, the paper provides remedies for it. All of the proposed remedies involve binary indicator variables (fixed effects) only, and they are nonlinear in both variables and parameters. We therefore dub these approaches as ones of a constrained analysis of variance (CANOVA) of bilateral exports or imports. We propose saturated as well as unsaturated versions of the CANOVA approach for both cross-section and panel data. The saturated approach uses up all degrees of freedom and estimates as many parameters as there are observations on bilateral exports or imports, providing an exact decomposition of bilateral trade into trade costs and country-specific parameters. The unsaturated approaches do not use up all degrees of freedom and estimate fewer parameters than there are observations on bilateral exports or imports, providing an approximate decomposition of bilateral trade into trade costs and country-specific parameters. We demonstrate that with panel data an unsaturated model with exporter-time, importer-time and country-pair effects works quite well relative to both the saturated model as well as models with parameterized trade-cost functions. The conclusions of the CANOVA models regarding the importance of trade costs for trade turn out to be substantially different from the ones implied by the conventional parameterized trade-cost-function models

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.cepr.org/active/publications/discussion_papers/dp.php?dpno=10427
Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Paper provided by C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers in its series CEPR Discussion Papers with number 10427.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Feb 2015
Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:10427
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Centre for Economic Policy Research, 77 Bastwick Street, London EC1V 3PZ.

Phone: 44 - 20 - 7183 8801
Fax: 44 - 20 - 7183 8820

Order Information: Email:


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. Kalina Manova, 2013. "Credit Constraints, Heterogeneous Firms, and International Trade," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 80(2), pages 711-744.
  2. Santos Silva, J.M.C. & Tenreyro, Silvana & Wei, Kehai, 2014. "Estimating the extensive margin of trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 67-75.
  3. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2004. "Trade Costs," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(3), pages 691-751, September.
  4. 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.
  5. Elisaveta Archanskaia & Guillaume Daudin, 2012. "Heterogeneity and the Distance Puzzle," Documents de Travail de l'OFCE 2012-17, Observatoire Francais des Conjonctures Economiques (OFCE).
  6. Torsten Persson, 2001. "Currency unions and trade: how large is the treatment effect?," Economic Policy, CEPR;CES;MSH, vol. 16(33), pages 433-462, October.
  7. Saxonhouse, Gary R, 1977. "Regressions from Samples Having Different Characteristics," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 59(2), pages 234-237, May.
  8. Jonathan Eaton & Robert Dekle & Samuel Kortum, 2007. "Unbalanced Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(2), pages 351-355, May.
  9. Krugman, Paul, 1980. "Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the Pattern of Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 950-959, December.
  10. Santos Silva, J.M.C. & Tenreyro, Silvana, 2011. "Further simulation evidence on the performance of the Poisson pseudo-maximum likelihood estimator," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 112(2), pages 220-222, August.
  11. James E. Anderson & Yoto V. Yotov, 2010. "The Changing Incidence of Geography," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(5), pages 2157-2186, December.
  12. Richard Baldwin & Daria Taglioni, 2006. "Gravity for Dummies and Dummies for Gravity Equations," NBER Working Papers 12516, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  13. Balistreri, Edward J. & Rutherford, Thomas F., 2013. "Computing General Equilibrium Theories of Monopolistic Competition and Heterogeneous Firms," Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, Elsevier.
  14. Costas Arkolakis & Natalia Ramondo & Andrés Rodríguez-Clare & Stephen Yeaple, 2013. "Innovation and Production in the Global Economy," NBER Working Papers 18972, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  15. Daniel J. Henderson & Daniel L. Millimet, 2008. "Is gravity linear?," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(2), pages 137-172.
  16. Egger, Peter H. & Lassmann, Andrea, 2012. "The language effect in international trade: A meta-analysis," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 221-224.
  17. Harrigan, James, 1996. "Openness to trade in manufactures in the OECD," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1-2), pages 23-39, February.
  18. Peter Egger & Michael Pfaffermayr, 2004. "Distance, trade and FDI: a Hausman-Taylor SUR approach," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(2), pages 227-246.
  19. Baltagi, Badi H. & Egger, Peter & Pfaffermayr, Michael, 2003. "A generalized design for bilateral trade flow models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 391-397, September.
  20. James E. Anderson & Douglas Marcouiller, 2002. "Insecurity And The Pattern Of Trade: An Empirical Investigation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(2), pages 342-352, May.
  21. J. M. C. Santos Silva & Silvana Tenreyro, 2006. "The Log of Gravity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(4), pages 641-658, November.
  22. Treb Allen & Costas Arkolakis & Yuta Takahashi, 2014. "Universal Gravity," NBER Working Papers 20787, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  23. Michael E. Waugh, 2010. "International Trade and Income Differences," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(5), pages 2093-2124, December.
  24. Elhanan Helpman & Marc Melitz & Yona Rubinstein, 2008. "Estimating Trade Flows: Trading Partners and Trading Volumes," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 123(2), pages 441-487.
  25. Jonathan Eaton & Samuel Kortum & Brent Neiman & John Romalis, 2016. "Trade and the Global Recession," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(11), pages 3401-3438, November.
  26. Hillberry, Russell & Hummels, David, 2008. "Trade responses to geographic frictions: A decomposition using micro-data," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 527-550, April.
  27. Alvarez, Fernando & Lucas, Robert Jr., 2007. "General equilibrium analysis of the Eaton-Kortum model of international trade," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(6), pages 1726-1768, September.
  28. Costas Arkolakis & Arnaud Costinot & Andres Rodriguez-Clare, 2012. "New Trade Models, Same Old Gains?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(1), pages 94-130, February.
  29. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
  30. Balistreri, Edward J. & Hillberry, Russell H., 2007. "Structural estimation and the border puzzle," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 451-463, July.
  31. Arnaud Costinot & Dave Donaldson & Ivana Komunjer, 2012. "What Goods Do Countries Trade? A Quantitative Exploration of Ricardo's Ideas," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 79(2), pages 581-608.
  32. Baier, Scott L. & Bergstrand, Jeffrey H., 2007. "Do free trade agreements actually increase members' international trade?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 72-95, March.
  33. Harry Flam & Hakan Nordström, 2011. "Gravity Estimation of the Intensive and Extensive Margins of Trade: An Alternative Procedure with Alternative Data," CESifo Working Paper Series 3387, CESifo Group Munich.
  34. Bergstrand, Jeffrey H. & Egger, Peter & Larch, Mario, 2013. "Gravity Redux: Estimation of gravity-equation coefficients, elasticities of substitution, and general equilibrium comparative statics under asymmetric bilateral trade costs," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 110-121.
  35. Jonathan Eaton & Samuel Kortum, 2002. "Technology, Geography, and Trade," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(5), pages 1741-1779, September.
  36. Jonathan Vogel & Ariel Burstein, 2012. "International trade, technology, and the skill premium," 2012 Meeting Papers 664, Society for Economic Dynamics.
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:cpr:ceprdp:10427. 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.