IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/lvl/creacr/2016-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Trade in environmental goods: how important are trade costs elasticities?

Author

Listed:
  • Lota Dabio Tamini
  • Sorgho Zakaria

Abstract

Negotiations on the liberalization of environmental goods (EGs) and services within the WTO Doha Round (mandated in November 2001) are facing specific challenges. Conflicting interests and differing perceptions of the benefits of increased trade in EGs were reflected in different approaches proposed for determining EGs. Using import data of 34 OECD member countries and from a sample of 167 countries, from 1995 to 2012, we discuss the trade effect of reducing barriers on EGs. We analyze the lists of EGs proposed by the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) using a Translog gravity model. We found that removing tariff barriers for EGs will have a modest impact because for the biggest importers and exporters, elasticities of trade costs are very low while for most trading relationships they are very high, making it difficult for exporters to maintain their markets. Overall, our results suggest that, because of their substantial effect on international trade, future negotiations on EGs should also address the issues of standards and nontariff barriers (NTBs).

Suggested Citation

  • Lota Dabio Tamini & Sorgho Zakaria, 2016. "Trade in environmental goods: how important are trade costs elasticities?," Cahiers de recherche CREATE 2016-3, CREATE.
  • Handle: RePEc:lvl:creacr:2016-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.create.ulaval.ca/sites/create.ulaval.ca/files/Publications/taminisorgho-2016-3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hiau LooiKee & Alessandro Nicita & Marcelo Olarreaga, 2009. "Estimating Trade Restrictiveness Indices," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(534), pages 172-199, January.
    2. Monika Mr?zov? & J. Peter Neary, 2014. "Together at Last: Trade Costs, Demand Structure, and Welfare," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(5), pages 298-303, May.
    3. Gabriel J Felbermayr & Wilhelm Kohler, 2014. "Exploring the Intensive and Extensive Margins of World Trade," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: European Economic Integration, WTO Membership, Immigration and Offshoring, chapter 4, pages 115-148, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Thomas Chaney, 2008. "Distorted Gravity: The Intensive and Extensive Margins of International Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(4), pages 1707-1721, September.
    5. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2004. "Trade Costs," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(3), pages 691-751, September.
    6. Alain-Désiré Nimubona, 2010. "Pollution Policy and Liberalization of Trade in Environmental Goods," Working Papers 1004, University of Waterloo, Department of Economics, revised May 2010.
    7. Novy, Dennis, 2013. "International trade without CES: Estimating translog gravity," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 271-282.
    8. 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.
    9. Lovely, Mary & Popp, David, 2011. "Trade, technology, and the environment: Does access to technology promote environmental regulation?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 16-35, January.
    10. Qi He & Hong Fang & Miao Wang & Bo Peng, 2015. "Trade liberalization and trade performance of environmental goods: evidence from Asia-Pacific economic cooperation members," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(29), pages 3021-3039, June.
    11. 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.
    12. Natalie Chen & Jean Imbs & Andrew Scott, 2009. "The Dynamics of Trade and Competition," Post-Print hal-00612547, HAL.
    13. Feenstra, Robert C., 2003. "A homothetic utility function for monopolistic competition models, without constant price elasticity," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 79-86, January.
    14. Chen, Natalie & Imbs, Jean & Scott, Andrew, 2009. "The dynamics of trade and competition," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 50-62, February.
    15. Brian R. Copeland & M. Scott Taylor, 2004. "Trade, Growth, and the Environment," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(1), pages 7-71, March.
    16. Harald Badinger, 2007. "Has the EU's Single Market Programme Fostered Competition? Testing for a Decrease in Mark‐up Ratios in EU Industries," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 69(4), pages 497-519, August.
    17. Joan Canton & Antoine Soubeyran & Hubert Stahn, 2008. "Environmental Taxation and Vertical Cournot Oligopolies: How Eco-industries Matter," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 40(3), pages 369-382, July.
    18. J. M. C. Santos Silva & Silvana Tenreyro, 2006. "The Log of Gravity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(4), pages 641-658, November.
    19. Feenstra, Robert C., 2010. "New products with a symmetric AIDS expenditure function," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 106(2), pages 108-111, February.
    20. Alexandre Gohin & Fabienne Féménia, 2009. "Estimating Price Elasticities of Food Trade Functions: How Relevant is the CES‐based Gravity Approach?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(2), pages 253-272, June.
    21. Martínez-Zarzoso, Inmaculada & Felicitas, Nowak-Lehmann D. & Horsewood, Nicholas, 2009. "Are regional trading agreements beneficial?: Static and dynamic panel gravity models," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 46-65, March.
    22. Elhanan Helpman & Marc Melitz & Yona Rubinstein, 2008. "Estimating Trade Flows: Trading Partners and Trading Volumes," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 123(2), pages 441-487.
    23. David, Maia & Nimubona, Alain-Désiré & Sinclair-Desgagné, Bernard, 2011. "Emission taxes and the market for abatement goods and services," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 179-191, January.
    24. Balineau, Gaã‹Lle & De Melo, Jaime, 2013. "Removing barriers to trade on environmental goods: an appraisal," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(4), pages 693-718, October.
    25. Managi, Shunsuke & Hibiki, Akira & Tsurumi, Tetsuya, 2009. "Does trade openness improve environmental quality?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 346-363, November.
    26. Alain-Désiré Nimubona & Hassan Benchekroun, 2014. "Environmental R&D in the Presence of an Eco-Industry," Working Papers 1406, University of Waterloo, Department of Economics, revised Sep 2014.
    27. Maia David & Bernard Sinclair-Desgagné, 2010. "Pollution Abatement Subsidies and the Eco-Industry," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(2), pages 271-282, February.
    28. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    29. Jeffrey A. Frankel & Andrew K. Rose, 2005. "Is Trade Good or Bad for the Environment? Sorting Out the Causality," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 87(1), pages 85-91, February.
    30. David Hummels & Peter J. Klenow, 2005. "The Variety and Quality of a Nation's Exports," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(3), pages 704-723, June.
    31. repec:lmu:muenar:20646 is not listed on IDEAS
    32. Baier, Scott L. & Bergstrand, Jeffrey H., 2007. "Do free trade agreements actually increase members' international trade?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 72-95, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Lota D. Tamini & Zakaria Sorgho, 2018. "Trade in Environmental Goods: Evidences from an Analysis Using Elasticities of Trade Costs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 70(1), pages 53-75, May.
    2. Carl Gaigné & Lota D. Tamini, 2018. "Environmental regulation and eco-industry trade: Theory and evidence from the European Union," Working Papers SMART - LERECO 18-09, INRAE UMR SMART-LERECO.
    3. Carl Gaigné & Lota D. Tamini, 2021. "Environmental Taxation and Import Demand for Environmental Goods: Theory and Evidence from the European Union," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 78(2), pages 307-352, February.
    4. Novy, Dennis, 2013. "International trade without CES: Estimating translog gravity," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 271-282.
    5. Lota D. Tamini & Maurice Doyon & Rodrigue Simon, 2016. "Analyzing Trade Liberalization Effects in the Egg Sector Using a Dynamic Gravity Model," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 64(2), pages 383-411, June.
    6. Bo Xiong & Sixia Chen, 2014. "Estimating gravity equation models in the presence of sample selection and heteroscedasticity," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(24), pages 2993-3003, August.
    7. Tamini, Lota D. & Chebbi, Houssem Eddine & Abbassi, Abdessalem, 2016. "Trade performance and potential of North African countries: An application of a stochastic frontier gravity model," AGRODEP working papers 33, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    8. 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.
    9. Chen, Natalie & Novy, Dennis, 2021. "Gravity and Heterogeneous Trade Cost Elasticities," CEPR Discussion Papers 16318, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    10. Margherita Scoppola & Valentina Raimondi & Alessandro Olper, 2018. "The impact of EU trade preferences on the extensive and intensive margins of agricultural and food products," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(2), pages 251-263, March.
    11. Natalia Zugravu-Soilita, 2017. "Trade in Environmental Goods: Empirical Exploration of Direct and Indirect Effects on Pollution by Country’s Trade Status," Working Papers 2017.56, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    12. Elizaveta Archanskaia & Guillaume Daudin, 2012. "Heterogeneity and the Distance Puzzle," FIW Working Paper series 095, FIW.
    13. Elhanan Helpman & Marc Melitz & Yona Rubinstein, 2008. "Estimating Trade Flows: Trading Partners and Trading Volumes," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 123(2), pages 441-487.
    14. Dutt, Pushan & Mihov, Ilian & Van Zandt, Timothy, 2013. "The effect of WTO on the extensive and the intensive margins of trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 204-219.
    15. Maria Cipollina & Luca De Benedictis & Luca Salvatici & Claudio Vicarelli, 2016. "Policy Measurement And Multilateral Resistance In Gravity Models," Working Papers LuissLab 16130, Dipartimento di Economia e Finanza, LUISS Guido Carli.
    16. Natalia Zugravu-Soilita, 2019. "Trade in Environmental Goods and Air Pollution: A Mediation Analysis to Estimate Total, Direct and Indirect Effects," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(3), pages 1125-1162, November.
    17. Valeria Costantini & Francesco Crespi, 2013. "Public policies for a sustainable energy sector: regulation, diversity and fostering of innovation," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 401-429, April.
    18. Chen, Natalie & Novy, Dennis, 2008. "International Trade Integration: A Disaggregated Approach," CEPR Discussion Papers 7103, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Gregory Corcos & Massimo Del Gatto & Giordano Mion & Gianmarco I.P. Ottaviano, 2012. "Productivity and Firm Selection: Quantifying the ‘New’ Gains from Trade," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 122(561), pages 754-798, June.
    20. Mario Larch & Pehr-Johan Norbäck & Steffen Sirries & Dieter M. Urban, 2016. "Heterogeneous Firms, Globalisation and the Distance Puzzle," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(9), pages 1307-1338, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Goods; Translog; Gravity; Trade costs elasticity; Import share;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F11 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Neoclassical Models of Trade
    • F12 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Models of Trade with Imperfect Competition and Scale Economies; Fragmentation
    • 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:lvl:creacr:2016-3. 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/calvlca.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: Manuel Paradis (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/calvlca.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.