IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/era/wpaper/dp-2014-18.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How Restrictive Are ASEAN's RoO?

Author

Listed:
  • Olivier CADOT

    (University of Lausanne, CEPR and FERDI)

  • Lili Yan ING

    (Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA) and University of Indonesia)

Abstract

This paper uses a disaggregated (product-level) gravity approach to estimate the effect of ASEAN’s product-specific rules of origin (RoO) on regional trade, using original data on rules applicable at the six-digit level of the harmonized system. Overall, we find that the average ad-valorem equivalent (AVE) of ASEAN’s RoO’s is 3.40 percent across all instruments and sectors. The trade-weighted average is 2.09 percent. This moderate estimate is in line with the existing literature. However, we also find fairly high AVEs for some sectors including leather, textile and apparel, footwear, and automobiles. We also find that some rules appear more restrictive than others; in this regard, the Textile Rule seems to stand out as a relatively more trade-inhibiting rule than others.

Suggested Citation

  • Olivier CADOT & Lili Yan ING, 2014. "How Restrictive Are ASEAN's RoO?," Working Papers DP-2014-18, Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA).
  • Handle: RePEc:era:wpaper:dp-2014-18
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.eria.org/ERIA-DP-2014-18.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Calvo-Pardo, Hector & Freund, Caroline & Ornelas, Emanuel, 2009. "The ASEAN free trade agreement : impact on trade flows and external trade barriers," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4960, The World Bank.
    2. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1995. "The Politics of Free-Trade Agreements," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 667-690, September.
    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. Joseph Francois & Bernard Hoekman & Miriam Manchin, 2006. "Preference Erosion and Multilateral Trade Liberalization," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 20(2), pages 197-216.
    5. repec:idb:brikps:16558 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Paul Brenton & Miriam Manchin, 2003. "Making EU Trade Agreements Work: The Role of Rules of Origin," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(5), pages 755-769, May.
    7. Aaditya Mattoo & Devesh Roy & Arvind Subramanian, 2003. "The Africa Growth and Opportunity Act and its Rules of Origin: Generosity Undermined?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(6), pages 829-851, June.
    8. Richard E. Baldwin, 2011. "Multilateralising Regionalism: Spaghetti Bowls as Building Blocks on the Path to Global Free Trade," Chapters, in: Miroslav N. Jovanović (ed.), International Handbook on the Economics of Integration, Volume I, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Medalla, Erlinda M. & Balboa, Jenny D., 2009. "ASEAN Rules of Origin: Lessons and Recommendations for Best Practice," Discussion Papers DP 2009-36, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    10. Candau, Fabien & Jean, Sebastien, 2005. "What Are EU Trade Preferences Worth for Sub-Saharan Africa and Other Developing Countries?," Working Papers 18863, TRADEAG - Agricultural Trade Agreements.
    11. Portugal-Perez, Alberto, 2009. "Assessing the impact of political economy factors on rules of origin under NAFTA," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4848, The World Bank.
    12. Erlinda M. MEDALLA & Jenny BALBOA, 2009. "ASEAN Rules of Origin: Lessons and Recommendations for Best Practice," Working Papers d020, Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA).
    13. Leamer, Edward E, 1974. "The Commodity Composition of International Trade in Manufactures: An Empirical Analysis," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(3), pages 350-374, November.
    14. Robert Koopman & William Powers & Zhi Wang & Shang-Jin Wei, 2010. "Give Credit Where Credit Is Due: Tracing Value Added in Global Production Chains," NBER Working Papers 16426, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Mari Pangestu & Sjamsu Rahardja & Lili Yan Ing, 2015. "Fifty Years Of Trade Policy In Indonesia: New World Trade, Old Treatments," Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(2), pages 239-261, August.
    2. Lili Yan Ing & Shujiro Urata & Yoshifumi Fukunaga, . "How Do Exports and Imports Affect the Use of Free Trade Agreements? Firm-level Survey Evidence from Southeast Asia," Chapters,, Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA).

    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. Olivier Cadot & Lili Yan Ing, 2016. "How Restrictive Are ASEAN's Rules of Origin?," Asian Economic Papers, MIT Press, vol. 15(3), pages 115-134, Fall.
    2. Maria Cipollina & David Laborde Debucquet & Luca Salvatici, 2017. "The tide that does not raise all boats: an assessment of EU preferential trade policies," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 153(1), pages 199-231, February.
    3. Kala Krishna, 2005. "Understanding Rules of Origin," NBER Working Papers 11150, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Sinéad Kelleher, 2012. "Playing by the Rules? The Development of an Amended Index to Measure the Impact of Rules of Origin on Intra-PTA Trade Flows," Working Papers 201222, School of Economics, University College Dublin.
    5. Valentina Raimondi & Margherita Scoppola & Alessandro Olper, 2012. "Preference erosion and the developing countries exports to the EU: a dynamic panel gravity approach," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 148(4), pages 707-732, December.
    6. Fugazza, Marco & Nicita, Alessandro, 2013. "The direct and relative effects of preferential market access," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 357-368.
    7. Antoine Bouët & Lionel Fontagné & Sébastien Jean, 2005. "Is Erosion of Tariff Preferences a Serious Concern?," Working Papers 2005-14, CEPII research center.
    8. Bureau, Jean-Christophe & Chakir, Raja & Gallezot, Jacques, 2006. "The Utilisation of EU and US Trade Preferences for Developing Countries in the Agri-Food Sector," Working Papers 18867, TRADEAG - Agricultural Trade Agreements.
    9. Hoekman. Bernard & Prowse, Susan, 2005. "Economic policy responses to preference erosion : from trade as aid toaid for trade," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3721, The World Bank.
    10. Nathalie Jorzik & Frank Mueller‐Langer, 2020. "Multilateral stability and efficiency of trade agreements: A network formation approach," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(2), pages 355-370, February.
    11. Aldaba, Rafaelita M. & Medalla, Erlinda M. & Yap, Josef T. & Rosellon, Maureen Ane D. & del Prado, Fatima & Mantaring, Melalyn C. & Ledda, Veredigna M., 2015. "How Are Firms Responding to Philippine Free Trade Agreements?," Discussion Papers DP 2015-22, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    12. Cipollina, Maria & Salvatici, Luca, 2007. "EU and developing countries: an analysis of preferential margins on agricultural trade flows," Working Papers 7219, TRADEAG - Agricultural Trade Agreements.
    13. Richard Baldwin & Javier Lopez-Gonzalez, 2015. "Supply-chain Trade: A Portrait of Global Patterns and Several Testable Hypotheses," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(11), pages 1682-1721, November.
    14. Hayakawa, Kazunobu & Nuttawut, Laksanapanyakul & Shiino, Kohei, 2013. "Some practical guidance for the computation of free trade agreement utilization rates," IDE Discussion Papers 438, Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization(JETRO).
    15. Scott McDonald & Terrie Walmsley, 2008. "Bilateral Free Trade Agreements and Customs Unions: The Impact of the EU Republic of South Africa Free Trade Agreement on Botswana," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(8), pages 993-1029, August.
    16. Aaditya Mattoo & Devesh Roy & Arvind Subramanian, 2003. "The Africa Growth and Opportunity Act and its Rules of Origin: Generosity Undermined?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(6), pages 829-851, June.
    17. Mari Pangestu & Lili Yan Ing, 2016. "ASEAN: Regional Integration and Reforms," Asian Economic Papers, MIT Press, vol. 15(2), pages 44-60, Summer.
    18. Sauvé, Pierre & Shingal, Anirudh, 2014. "Why do Countries enter into Preferential Agreements on Trade in Services? Assessing the Potential for Negotiated Regulatory Convergence in Asian Services Markets," Working Papers on Regional Economic Integration 129, Asian Development Bank.
    19. Céline Carrère & Maurice Schiff, 2005. "On the Geography of Trade. Distance is Alive and Well," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 56(6), pages 1249-1274.
    20. José Anson & Olivier Cadot & Antoni Estevadeordal & Jaime de Melo & Akiko Suwa‐Eisenmann & Bolormaa Tumurchudur, 2005. "Rules of Origin in North–South Preferential Trading Arrangements with an Application to NAFTA," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 501-517, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Rules of Origin; Gravity equation; International Trade; ASEAN; Global Value Chains;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F12 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Models of Trade with Imperfect Competition and Scale Economies; Fragmentation
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • 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:era:wpaper:dp-2014-18. 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: (Ranti Amelia). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eriadid.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.