IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Home Market Effect Hypothesis in a Multi-Country World



The home market effect (HME) is commonly defined as a more than proportional positive causation from demand to supply. Recent theoretical literature, however, shows that the traditional definition highlighted within two-country framework does not always survive in higher dimensional settings. This is because ‘third’ country effects (i.e. adjustments in foreign expenditures) may reverse the positive impact that an increase in domestic demand has on its production. As such, empirical implementations of the HME hypothesis are problematic. In this paper, we try to fill this gap by proposing a revised version of the HME test, robust to an arbitrary number of countries. Using Behrens et al. (2004), which extends Krugman (1980) model to a multi-country setting, we derive a theory-founded empirical specification that accounts for a complete geographical structure of demand and proximity incentives offered to firms when choosing location sites to set up production facilities. We estimate the evolution of production structure in the EU countries for 24 manufacturing sectors over 1979-1999. We find support for the presence of the HME in a number of industries. The results also emphasize the importance of countries access to foreign markets.

Suggested Citation

  • Nana Bourtchouladze, 2007. "Home Market Effect Hypothesis in a Multi-Country World," IHEID Working Papers 16-2007, Economics Section, The Graduate Institute of International Studies, revised Feb 2007.
  • Handle: RePEc:gii:giihei:heiwp16-2007

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Okubo, Toshihiro, 2009. "Trade liberalisation and agglomeration with firm heterogeneity: Forward and backward linkages," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 530-541, September.
    2. Andrew B. Bernard & Jonathan Eaton & J. Bradford Jensen & Samuel Kortum, 2003. "Plants and Productivity in International Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(4), pages 1268-1290, September.
    3. Elhanan Helpman & Marc J. Melitz & Stephen R. Yeaple, 2003. "Export versus FDI," NBER Working Papers 9439, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Jonathan Eaton & Samuel Kortum & Francis Kramarz, 2004. "Dissecting Trade: Firms, Industries, and Export Destinations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(2), pages 150-154, May.
    5. Fumagalli, Chiara, 2003. "On the welfare effects of competition for foreign direct investments," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 963-983, December.
    6. Sofronis K. Clerides & Saul Lach & James R. Tybout, 1998. "Is Learning by Exporting Important? Micro-Dynamic Evidence from Colombia, Mexico, and Morocco," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 113(3), pages 903-947.
    7. Toshihiro Okubo & Vincent Rebeyrol, 2006. "Home Market Effect and Regulation Costs - Homogeneous Firm and Heterogeneous Firm Trade Models," IHEID Working Papers 02-2006, Economics Section, The Graduate Institute of International Studies.
    8. Marc J. Melitz & Gianmarco I. P. Ottaviano, 2008. "Market Size, Trade, and Productivity," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 75(1), pages 295-316.
    9. Richard E. Baldwin & Toshihiro Okubo, 2006. "Heterogeneous firms, agglomeration and economic geography: spatial selection and sorting," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(3), pages 323-346, June.
    10. Barros, Pedro P & Cabral, Luis, 2000. "Competing for Foreign Direct Investment," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(2), pages 360-371, May.
    11. Andrew B. Bernard & Stephen J. Redding & Peter K. Schott, 2007. "Comparative Advantage and Heterogeneous Firms," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 74(1), pages 31-66.
    12. Facundo Albornoz & Grégory Corcos, 2005. "Subsidy competition in integrating economies," PSE Working Papers halshs-00590785, HAL.
    13. Vincent Dupont & Philippe Martin, 2006. "Subsidies to poor regions and inequalities: some unpleasant arithmetic," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 223-240, April.
    14. Torsten Persson & Guido Tabellini, 2002. "Political Economics: Explaining Economic Policy," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262661314, January.
    15. Vincent Dupont & Philippe Martin, 2006. "Subsidies to Poor Regions and Inequalities: Some Unpleasant Arithmetic," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00176909, HAL.
    16. Martin, Philippe & Mayer, Thierry & Mayneris, Florian, 2011. "Public support to clusters: A firm level study of French "Local Productive Systems"," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 108-123, March.
    17. Mohl, P. & Hagen, T., 2010. "Do EU structural funds promote regional growth? New evidence from various panel data approaches," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 353-365, September.
    18. 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.
    19. Andrew B. Bernard & J. Bradford Jensen, 2004. "Why Some Firms Export," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(2), pages 561-569, May.
    20. Bee Yan Aw & Sukkyun Chung & Mark J. Roberts, 1998. "Productivity and the Decision to Export: Micro Evidence from Taiwan and South Korea," NBER Working Papers 6558, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Richard Baldwin & Toshihiro Okubo, 2009. "Tax Reform, Delocation, and Heterogeneous Firms," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 111(4), pages 741-764, December.
    22. Baldwin, Richard & Okubo, Toshihiro, 2006. "Agglomeration, Offshoring and Heterogenous Firms," CEPR Discussion Papers 5663, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    23. Karen Helene Midelfart-Knarvik & Henry G. Overman, 2002. "Delocation and European integration: is structural spending justified?," Economic Policy, CEPR;CES;MSH, vol. 17(35), pages 321-359, October.
    24. Martin, Philippe & Rogers, Carol Ann, 1995. "Industrial location and public infrastructure," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3-4), pages 335-351, November.
    25. Toshihiro Okubo & Eiichi Tomiura, 2010. "Industrial relocation policy and heterogeneous plants sorted by productivity: Evidence from Japan," Discussion Paper Series DP2010-35, Research Institute for Economics & Business Administration, Kobe University.
    26. K.H. Midelfart & H.G. Overman & S.J. Redding & A.J. Venables, 2000. "The location of European industry," European Economy - Economic Papers 2008 - 2015 142, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    New trade theory; multi-country models; economic geography; home market effect; market potential; market access;

    JEL classification:

    • F12 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Models of Trade with Imperfect Competition and Scale Economies; Fragmentation
    • F14 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Empirical Studies of Trade
    • F17 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Forecasting and Simulation
    • R11 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Regional Economic Activity: Growth, Development, Environmental Issues, and Changes
    • R12 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Size and Spatial Distributions of Regional Economic Activity; Interregional Trade (economic geography)

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:gii:giihei:heiwp16-2007. 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: (Dorina Dobre). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.