IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fip/feddgw/341.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Gains from Trade: Does Sectoral Heterogeneity Matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Rahul Giri
  • Kei-Mu Yi
  • Hakan Yilmazkuday

Abstract

This paper assesses the quantitative importance of including sectoral heterogeneity in computing the gains from trade. Our framework draws from Caliendo and Parro (2015) and Alvarez and Lucas (2007) and has sectoral heterogeneity along five dimensions, including the elasticity of trade to trade costs, the value-added share, and the input-output structure. The key parameter we estimate is the sectoral trade elasticity, and we use the Simonovska and Waugh (2014) simulated method of moments estimator with micro price data. Our estimates range from 2.97 to 8.94, considerably lower than those obtained with the Eaton and Kortum (2002) price-based method. Our benchmark model is calibrated to 21 OECD countries and 20 sectors. We compute the gains from trade in our benchmark model, and in several re-calibrated versions of the model in which we eliminate one or more sources of sectoral heterogeneity. Our main result is that sectoral heterogeneity does not always lead to an increase in the gains from trade. There are two reasons for this. First, the magnitudes of our estimated sectoral trade elasticities are relatively high, while the magnitude of our estimated aggregate trade elasticity is low. All else equal, this will lead to higher gains for the aggregate, one-sector model. Second, the sectors with low trade elasticities (hence, implying high gains from trade) are not the sectors with low value-added shares and with high initial trade shares (which would magnify the gains). Hence, the sectoral heterogeneity in our calibrated model does not exert complementary gains from trade effects.

Suggested Citation

  • Rahul Giri & Kei-Mu Yi & Hakan Yilmazkuday, 2018. "Gains from Trade: Does Sectoral Heterogeneity Matter?," Globalization Institute Working Papers 341, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
  • Handle: RePEc:fip:feddgw:341
    DOI: 10.24149/gwp341
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.dallasfed.org/~/media/documents/institute/wpapers/2018/0341.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.24149/gwp341?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Levchenko, Andrei A. & Zhang, Jing, 2014. "Ricardian productivity differences and the gains from trade," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 45-65.
    2. Jean Imbs & Isabelle Mejean, 2015. "Elasticity Optimism," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(3), pages 43-83, July.
    3. Christian Broda & David E. Weinstein, 2006. "Globalization and the Gains From Variety," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 121(2), pages 541-585.
    4. Head, Keith & Mayer, Thierry, 2014. "Gravity Equations: Workhorse,Toolkit, and Cookbook," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 131-195, Elsevier.
    5. Simonovska, Ina & Waugh, Michael E., 2014. "The elasticity of trade: Estimates and evidence," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 34-50.
    6. Arnaud Costinot & Andrés Rodríguez-Clare, 2018. "The US Gains from Trade: Valuation Using the Demand for Foreign Factor Services," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 32(2), pages 3-24, Spring.
    7. Ozlem Inanc & Marios Zachariadis, 2012. "The Importance Of Trade Costs In Deviations From The Law-Of-One-Price: Estimates Based On The Direction Of Trade," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 50(3), pages 667-689, July.
    8. Jonathan Eaton & Samuel Kortum & Francis Kramarz, 2011. "An Anatomy of International Trade: Evidence From French Firms," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 79(5), pages 1453-1498, September.
    9. Feenstra, Robert C, 1994. "New Product Varieties and the Measurement of International Prices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(1), pages 157-177, March.
    10. Marc J. Melitz & Stephen J. Redding, 2015. "New Trade Models, New Welfare Implications," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(3), pages 1105-1146, March.
    11. Mario J. Crucini & Chris I. Telmer & Marios Zachariadis, 2005. "Understanding European Real Exchange Rates," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(3), pages 724-738, June.
    12. Rodrigo Adao & Arnaud Costinot & Dave Donaldson, 2017. "Nonparametric Counterfactual Predictions in Neoclassical Models of International Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(3), pages 633-689, March.
    13. Costinot, Arnaud & Rodríguez-Clare, Andrés, 2014. "Trade Theory with Numbers: Quantifying the Consequences of Globalization," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 197-261, Elsevier.
    14. Ossa, Ralph, 2015. "Why trade matters after all," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(2), pages 266-277.
    15. Michael E. Waugh, 2010. "International Trade and Income Differences," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(5), pages 2093-2124, December.
    16. Robert C. Feenstra & Philip Luck & Maurice Obstfeld & Katheryn N. Russ, 2018. "In Search of the Armington Elasticity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(1), pages 135-150, March.
    17. Marcel P. Timmer & Erik Dietzenbacher & Bart Los & Robert Stehrer & Gaaitzen J. Vries, 2015. "An Illustrated User Guide to the World Input–Output Database: the Case of Global Automotive Production," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 575-605, August.
    18. repec:hrv:faseco:34299161 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Marc J. Melitz, 2003. "The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(6), pages 1695-1725, November.
    20. Michael Waugh & Ina Simonovska, 2012. "Different Trade Models, Different Trade Elasticities?," 2012 Meeting Papers 618, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    21. Giri, Rahul, 2012. "Local costs of distribution, international trade costs and micro evidence on the law of one price," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(1), pages 82-100.
    22. 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.
    23. Robert Dekle & Jonathan Eaton & Samuel Kortum, 2008. "Global Rebalancing with Gravity: Measuring the Burden of Adjustment," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 55(3), pages 511-540, July.
    24. Lorenzo Caliendo & Fernando Parro, 2015. "Estimates of the Trade and Welfare Effects of NAFTA," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 82(1), pages 1-44.
    25. Jonathan Eaton & Samuel Kortum, 2002. "Technology, Geography, and Trade," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(5), pages 1741-1779, September.
    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. Joseph B. Steinberg, 2020. "The macroeconomic impact of NAFTA termination," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(2), pages 821-865, May.
    2. Ana Maria Santacreu & Jing Zhang & Michael Sposi, 2019. "A Quantitative Analysis of Tariffs across U.S. States," 2019 Meeting Papers 259, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    3. Boehm, Christoph & Levchenko, Andrei A. & Pandalai-Nayar, Nitya, 2020. "The Long and Short (Run) of Trade Elasticities," CEPR Discussion Papers 14645, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Lionel Fontagné & Houssein Guimbard & Gianluca Orefice, 2019. "Product-Level Trade Elasticities," Working Papers 2019-17, CEPII research center.
    5. Giri, Rahul, 2012. "Local costs of distribution, international trade costs and micro evidence on the law of one price," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(1), pages 82-100.
    6. Dominick Bartelme & Arnaud Costinot & Dave Donaldson & Andres Rodriguez-Clare, "undated". "The Textbook Case for Industrial Policy: Theory Meets Data," Working Papers 675, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    7. Joseph S. Shapiro, 2020. "The Environmental Bias of Trade Policy," NBER Working Papers 26845, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Joseph S Shapiro, 2021. "The Environmental Bias of Trade Policy," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 136(2), pages 831-886.
    9. Lionel Fontagné & Houssein Guimbard & Gianluca Orefice, 2020. "Product-Level Trade Elasticities: Worth Weighting For," Working Papers DT/2020/08, DIAL (Développement, Institutions et Mondialisation).

    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. Costinot, Arnaud & Rodríguez-Clare, Andrés, 2014. "Trade Theory with Numbers: Quantifying the Consequences of Globalization," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 197-261, Elsevier.
    2. Head, Keith & Mayer, Thierry, 2014. "Gravity Equations: Workhorse,Toolkit, and Cookbook," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 131-195, Elsevier.
    3. Bas, Maria & Mayer, Thierry & Thoenig, Mathias, 2017. "From micro to macro: Demand, supply, and heterogeneity in the trade elasticity," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 1-19.
    4. Patrick Alexander, 2016. "Producer Heterogeneity, Value-Added, and International Trade," Staff Working Papers 16-54, Bank of Canada.
    5. Fontagné, Lionel & Martin, Philippe & Orefice, Gianluca, 2018. "The international elasticity puzzle is worse than you think," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 115-129.
    6. French, Scott, 2016. "The composition of trade flows and the aggregate effects of trade barriers," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 114-137.
    7. Bajzik, Josef & Havranek, Tomas & Irsova, Zuzana & Schwarz, Jiri, 2020. "Estimating the Armington elasticity: The importance of study design and publication bias," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    8. Heid, Benedikt & Larch, Mario, 2016. "Gravity with unemployment," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 70-85.
    9. Felbermayr, Gabriel & Jung, Benjamin & Larch, Mario, 2015. "The welfare consequences of import tariffs: A quantitative perspective," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(2), pages 295-309.
    10. Ahmad Lashkaripour & Volodymyr Lugovskyy, 2017. "National Differentiation and Industry-Wide Scale Effects," CAEPR Working Papers 2017-004, Center for Applied Economics and Policy Research, Department of Economics, Indiana University Bloomington.
    11. Heerman, Kari E.R., 2020. "Technology, ecology and agricultural trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    12. Alviarez, Vanessa, 2019. "Multinational production and comparative advantage," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 1-54.
    13. Simonovska, Ina & Waugh, Michael E., 2014. "The elasticity of trade: Estimates and evidence," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 34-50.
    14. Kohler Wilhelm & Jung Benjamin, 2017. "Wie vorteilhaft ist internationaler Handel?: Ein neuer Ansatz zur Vermessung der Gewinne," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, De Gruyter, vol. 18(1), pages 32-55, April.
    15. Christian Hepenstrick & Alexander Tarasov, 2015. "Trade Openness and Cross-country Income Differences," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(2), pages 271-302, May.
    16. Nelson Lind & Natalia Ramondo, 2018. "Trade with Correlation," 2018 Meeting Papers 627, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    17. Nelson Lind & Natalia Ramondo, 2018. "Trade with Correlation," NBER Working Papers 24380, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Jonathan Eaton & Ana Cecília Fieler, 2019. "The Margins of Trade," NBER Working Papers 26124, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Alexander, Patrick D. & Keay, Ian, 2018. "A general equilibrium analysis of Canada’s national policy," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 1-15.
    20. Ramanarayanan, Ananth, 2020. "Imported inputs and the gains from trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    gains from trade; estimated trade elasticities; simulated method of moments; sectoral heterogeneity; international price dispersion; multi-sector trade;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F10 - International Economics - - Trade - - - General
    • F11 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Neoclassical Models of Trade
    • F14 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Empirical Studies of Trade
    • F17 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Forecasting and Simulation

    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:fip:feddgw:341. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/frbdaus.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 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: (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/frbdaus.html .

    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.