IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ctl/louvec/2005026.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Intra-European Trade of Manufacturing Goods : An extension of the Gravity Model

Author

Listed:
  • Marc VANCAUTEREN

    (WHU-Koblenz)

  • Daniel WEISERBS

    (UNIVERSITE CATHOLIQUE DE LOUVAIN, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES))

Abstract

In this paper, we propose and test several extensions of the standard gravity model. This yields a specification that allows for (i) a more flexible income response; (ii) a competitiveness effect with a general and a specific component; and (iii) an alternative and consistent measure of remoteness. Those extensions were found to be significant factors to explain intra-EU trade. Next, we analyze the effect of EU harmonization of technical regulations on domestic and intra-EU trade. We find, at different levels of aggregation of the manufacturing sector, that harmonization of regulations has contributed to more intra-EU trade but, apparently, did not affect the so called border effect.

Suggested Citation

  • Marc VANCAUTEREN & Daniel WEISERBS, 2005. "Intra-European Trade of Manufacturing Goods : An extension of the Gravity Model," Discussion Papers (ECON - Département des Sciences Economiques) 2005026, Université catholique de Louvain, Département des Sciences Economiques.
    • Handle: RePEc:ctl:louvec:2005026
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://sites.uclouvain.be/econ/DP/IRES/2005-26.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Carlin, Wendy & Glyn, Andrew & Van Reenen, John, 2001. "Export Market Performance of OECD Countries: An Empirical Examination of the Role of Cost Competitiveness," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(468), pages 128-162, January.
    3. Boucekkine Raouf & Ruiz Tamarit Ramon, 2004. "Imbalance Effects in the Lucas Model: an Analytical Exploration," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-19, December.
    4. Benhabib Jess & Perli Roberto, 1994. "Uniqueness and Indeterminacy: On the Dynamics of Endogenous Growth," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 113-142, June.
    5. 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.
    6. Bergstrand, Jeffrey H, 1985. "The Gravity Equation in International Trade: Some Microeconomic Foundations and Empirical Evidence," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 67(3), pages 474-481, August.
    7. 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/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(4), pages 1024-1041, November.
    8. Karim Abadir, 1999. "An introduction to hypergeometric functions for economists," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(3), pages 287-330.
    9. Casey B. Mulligan & Xavier Sala-i-Martin, 1993. "Transitional Dynamics in Two-Sector Models of Endogenous Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(3), pages 739-773.
    10. Alan V. Deardorff, 2011. "Determinants of Bilateral Trade: Does Gravity Work in a Neoclassical World?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Robert M Stern (ed.), Comparative Advantage, Growth, And The Gains From Trade And Globalization A Festschrift in Honor of Alan V Deardorff, chapter 24, pages 267-293, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    11. Bond, Eric W. & Wang, Ping & Yip, Chong K., 1996. "A General Two-Sector Model of Endogenous Growth with Human and Physical Capital: Balanced Growth and Transitional Dynamics," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 149-173, January.
    12. Beck, Nathaniel & Katz, Jonathan N., 1995. "What To Do (and Not to Do) with Time-Series Cross-Section Data," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(3), pages 634-647, September.
    13. Jacques Pelkmans, 1987. "The New Approach to Technical Harmonization and Standardization," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(3), pages 249-269, March.
    14. Frankel, Jeffrey & Stein, Ernesto & Wei, Shang-jin, 1995. "Trading blocs and the Americas: The natural, the unnatural, and the super-natural," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 61-95, June.
    15. Bergstrand, Jeffrey H, 1989. "The Generalized Gravity Equation, Monopolistic Competition, and the Factor-Proportions Theory in International Trade," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 71(1), pages 143-153, February.
    16. Keith Head & Thierry Mayer, 2000. "Non-Europe: The magnitude and causes of market fragmentation in the EU," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 136(2), pages 284-314, June.
    17. Francisco L. Rivera-Batiz & Luis A. Rivera-Batiz, 2018. "Economic Integration and Endogenous Growth," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Francisco L Rivera-Batiz & Luis A Rivera-Batiz (ed.), International Trade, Capital Flows and Economic Development, chapter 1, pages 3-32, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    18. Holger C. Wolf, 1997. "Patterns of Intra- and Inter-State Trade," NBER Working Papers 5939, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Caballe, Jordi & Santos, Manuel S, 1993. "On Endogenous Growth with Physical and Human Capital," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(6), pages 1042-1067, December.
    20. Harrigan, James, 1993. "OECD imports and trade barriers in 1983," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1-2), pages 91-111, August.
    21. Paul S. Armington, 1969. "A Theory of Demand for Products Distinguished by Place of Production (Une théorie de la demande de produits différenciés d'après leur origine) (Una teoría de la demanda de productos distinguiénd," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 16(1), pages 159-178, March.
    22. 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.
    23. John F. Helliwell, 1996. "Do National Borders Matter for Quebec's Trade?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 29(3), pages 507-522, August.
    24. James Banks & Richard Blundell & Arthur Lewbel, 1997. "Quadratic Engel Curves And Consumer Demand," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 79(4), pages 527-539, November.
    25. Egger, Peter, 2000. "A note on the proper econometric specification of the gravity equation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 25-31, January.
    26. McCallum, John, 1995. "National Borders Matter: Canada-U.S. Regional Trade Patterns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(3), pages 615-623, June.
    27. Peter Egger, 2002. "An Econometric View on the Estimation of Gravity Models and the Calculation of Trade Potentials," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 297-312, February.
    28. John F. Helliwell, 1997. "National Borders, Trade and Migration," NBER Working Papers 6027, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    29. Anderson, James E, 1979. "A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 106-116, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Clougherty, Joseph A. & Grajek, Michał, 2014. "International standards and international trade: Empirical evidence from ISO 9000 diffusion," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 70-82.
    2. Foletti, Liliana & MILE 02, Anirudh Shingal, 2014. "Trade effects of MRL harmonization in the EU," Papers 720, World Trade Institute.
    3. Joseph A. Clougherty & Michal Grajek, 2009. "ISO 9000: New form of protectionism or common language in international trade?," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-09-006, ESMT European School of Management and Technology.
    4. Zakaria Sorgho & Bruno Larue, 2014. "Geographical indication regulation and intra-trade in the European Union," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(S1), pages 1-12, November.
    5. Irwan Shah Zainal Abidin & Muhammad Haseeb & Rabiul Islam, 2016. "Regional Integration of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Economic Community: An Analysis of Malaysia - Association of Southeast Asian Nations Exports," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 6(2), pages 646-652.
    6. Ederington,Josh & Ruta,Michele, 2016. "Non-tariff measures and the world trading system," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7661, The World Bank.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2004. "Trade Costs," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(3), pages 691-751, September.
    2. Salvador Gil-Pareja & Rafael Llorca & Josè A. Martinez-Serrano, 2011. "Is There A Continental Bias In Trade?," ERSA conference papers ersa10p792, European Regional Science Association.
    3. Valeriano Martínez-San Román & Marta Bengoa & Blanca Sánchez-Robles, 2016. "Foreign direct investment, trade integration and the home bias: evidence from the European Union," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 197-229, February.
    4. Ghazalian, Pascal L. & Furtan, W. Hartley, 2008. "The effects of multinational activities on the measurement of home bias," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 401-416, September.
    5. Pacchioli, Consuelo, 2011. "Is the EU internal market suffering from an integration deficit?," CEPS Papers 5528, Centre for European Policy Studies.
    6. Michele Fratianni & Francesco Marchionne, 2011. "The Limits to Integration," Chapters, in: Miroslav N. Jovanović (ed.), International Handbook on the Economics of Integration, Volume I, chapter 9, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Nuria Gallego & Carlos Llano, 2014. "The Border Effect and the Nonlinear Relationship between Trade and Distance," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 1016-1048, November.
    8. Lionel Fontagné & Thierry Mayer & Soledad Zignago, 2005. "Trade in the Triad: how easy is the access to large markets?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 38(4), pages 1401-1430, November.
    9. Salvador Gil-Pareja & Rafael Llorca-Vivero & Jose Martinez-Serrano, 2006. "The border effect in Spain: The Basque Country case," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(4), pages 335-345.
    10. Matthias Helble, 2007. "Border Effect Estimates for France and Germany Combining International Trade and Intranational Transport Flows," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 143(3), pages 433-463, October.
    11. Sierra-Fernández, Mª Del Pilar & Martínez-Campillo, Almudena, 2009. "Impacto del proceso de integración europea sobre las exportaciones de Castilla y León (1993-2007): un análisis econométrico a partir de la ecuación de gravedad/The Impact of the European Integration P," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 27, pages 783(34á)-78, Diciembre.
    12. 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.
    13. Chen, Natalie & Novy, Dennis, 2011. "Gravity, trade integration, and heterogeneity across industries," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 206-221.
    14. Shumilov, Andrei, 2016. "Особенности Оценивания Гравитационных Моделей Международной Торговли [Estimating Gravity Models of International Trade: A Survey]," MPRA Paper 75371, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Olivier Lamotte, 2003. "Disintegration and trade in South-eastern Europe," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques j04031, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    16. Daniel L. Millimet & Thomas Osang, 2007. "Do state borders matter for U.S. intranational trade? The role of history and internal migration," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(1), pages 93-126, February.
    17. Estrella Gómez-Herrera, 2013. "Comparing alternative methods to estimate gravity models of bilateral trade," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 1087-1111, June.
    18. Ghemawat, Pankaj & Llano, Carlos & Requena, Francisco, 2009. "Rethinking regional competitiveness: Catalonia's international and interregional trade, 1995-2006," IESE Research Papers D/802, IESE Business School.
    19. Chen, Natalie & Novy, Dennis, 2008. "International Trade Integration: A Disaggregated Approach," CEPR Discussion Papers 7103, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Salvador Gil‐Pareja & Rafael Llorca‐Vivero & José A. Martínez‐Serrano & Josep Oliver‐Alonso, 2005. "The Border Effect in Spain," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(11), pages 1617-1631, November.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F11 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Neoclassical Models of Trade
    • F14 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Empirical Studies of Trade
    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ctl:louvec:2005026. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Virginie LEBLANC (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iruclbe.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.