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

Trade in the Triad: How Easy is the Access to Large Markets?

  • Fontagne, Lionel
  • Mayer, Thierry
  • Zignago, Soledad

We identify in this Paper the level of trade integration between the three largest economic powers of the world, often called the Triad: The United States, the EU and Japan. We focus on measuring possible asymmetries in market access between members of the Triad using border effects between each of those partners. We investigate trends of bilateral trade openness and show notably that there has been a deterioration of the relative access of Japanese exporters on both the American and EU markets in the 1990s. Results also show which industries have the most asymmetric market access among the different combinations of those partners. We finally provide explanations for the estimated border effects using proxies for bilateral observed protection (tariffs and NTBs), home bias of consumers, product differentiation and levels of FDI. Tariffs still matter in shaping trade patterns even in cases where those tariffs are low in magnitude. The explanations related to actual protection, home bias and substitutability of goods put together explain a large part of the border effect between blocs of the triad, although they do not explain the whole of the border effect puzzle.

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=4442
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 4442.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Jun 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:4442
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. Bernard Hoekman & Francis Ng & Marcelo Olarreaga, 2002. "Eliminating Excessive Tariffs on Exports of Least Developed Countries," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 16(1), pages 1-21, June.
  2. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2004. "Trade Costs," NBER Working Papers 10480, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. Hélène Erkel-Rousse & Daniel Mirza, 2002. "Import price elasticities: reconsidering the evidence," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 35(2), pages 282-306, May.
  4. Simon J. Evenett & Wolfgang Keller, 2002. "On Theories Explaining the Success of the Gravity Equation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(2), pages 281-316, April.
  5. 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.
  6. Maurice Obstfeld & Kenneth Rogoff, 2000. "The Six Major Puzzles in International Macroeconomics: Is There a Common Cause?," NBER Working Papers 7777, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  7. Obstfeld, Maurice, 2002. "Exchange Rates and Adjustment: Perspectives from the New Open Economy Macroeconomics," CEPR Discussion Papers 3533, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  8. Jong-Wha Lee & Phillip Swagel, 1994. "Trade Barriers and Trade Flows across Countries and Industries," NBER Working Papers 4799, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  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. Jonathan Eaton & Samuel Kortum, 2002. "Technology, Geography, and Trade," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(5), pages 1741-1779, September.
  11. Harrigan, James, 1996. "Openness to trade in manufactures in the OECD," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1-2), pages 23-39, February.
  12. Huiwen Lai & Daniel Trefler, 2002. "The Gains from Trade with Monopolistic Competition: Specification, Estimation, and Mis-Specification," NBER Working Papers 9169, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  13. Shang-Jin Wei, 1996. "Intra-National versus International Trade: How Stubborn are Nations in Global Integration?," NBER Working Papers 5531, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  14. Keith Head & Thierry Mayer, 2001. "Effet frontière, intégration économique et "Forteresse Europe"," Working Papers 2001-06, CEPII research center.
  15. Scott Bradford, 2003. "Paying the Price: Final Goods Protection in OECD Countries," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(1), pages 24-37, February.
  16. Carolyn L. Evans, 2003. "The Economic Significance of National Border Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(4), pages 1291-1312, September.
  17. James Harrigan & Rohit Vanjani, 2003. "Is Japan's Trade (still) Different?," NBER Working Papers 10058, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  18. Keith Head & Thierry Mayer, 2000. "Non-Europe: The magnitude and causes of market fragmentation in the EU," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, vol. 136(2), pages 284-314, June.
  19. Holger C. Wolf, 1997. "Patterns of Intra- and Inter-State Trade," NBER Working Papers 5939, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  20. Jon D. Haveman & Usha Nair-Reichert & Jerry G. Thursby, 2003. "How Effective are Trade Barriers? An Empirical Analysis of Trade Reduction, Diversion, and Compression," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(2), pages 480-485, May.
  21. Chen, Natalie, 2004. "Intra-national versus international trade in the European Union: why do national borders matter?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 93-118, May.
  22. Lionel Fontagné & Friedrich von Kirchbach & Mondher Mimouni, 2001. "A First Assessment of Environment-Related Trade Barriers," Working Papers 2001-10, CEPII research center.
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:4442. 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: ()

The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask to update the entry or send us the correct address

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.