Intégration économique et agglomération des activités industrielles dans le Mercosur, les enseignements d'un modèle d'économie géographique
After ten years, the Mercosur seems to be the most successful integration process in Latin America. However, its development remains imperfect due to asymmetric situations between the countries. Brazil is the regional industrial block and the integration process would lead his partners to become captive markets and to see their domestic industrial production decrease.In order to analyze the possibility of such scenario, we adopt a New Economic Geography modelwith three regions and asymmetries. Its serves as a support to numerical simulations of trade liberalization in Mercosur. We show a redeployment of industrial activities from Brazil to Argentina, witch has the best differential of productivity, and may appear to be the new regional industrial block in the end of integration process. An empirical verification is donewith a Grubel-Lloyd indicator upon trade flows within Mercosur. It confirms largely theconclusions of the theoretical model. (Full text in French)
|Date of creation:||Jan 2001|
|Contact details of provider:|| |
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Ludema, Rodney D & Wooton, Ian, 1997.
"Regional Integration, Trade, and Migration: Are Demand Linkages Relevant in Europe?,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
1656, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Rodney D. Ludema & Ian Wooton, 1997. "Regional Integration, Trade, and Migration: Are Demand Linkages Relevant in Europe?," Working Papers 9704, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow, revised Jul 1997.
- Rodney D. Ludema & Ian Wooton, 1998. "Regional Integration, Trade, and Migration: Are Demand Linkages Relevant in Europe?," International Trade 9802001, EconWPA.
- Krugman, Paul, 1980. "Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the Pattern of Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 950-959, December.
- Puga, Diego & Venables, Anthony J., 1997. "Preferential trading arrangements and industrial location," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(3-4), pages 347-368, November.
- Diego Puga & Tony Venables, 1995. "Preferential trading arrangements and industrial location," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 2151, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
- Diego Puga & Anthony J. Venables, 1995. "Preferential Trading Arrangements and Industrial Location," CEP Discussion Papers dp0267, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
- Puga, Diego & Venables, Anthony J, 1995. "Preferential Trading Arrangements and Industrial Location," CEPR Discussion Papers 1309, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Krugman, Paul, 1991. "Increasing Returns and Economic Geography," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(3), pages 483-499, June.
- Paul Krugman, 1990. "Increasing Returns and Economic Geography," NBER Working Papers 3275, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Krugman, Paul & Venables, Anthony J., 1996. "Integration, specialization, and adjustment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(3-5), pages 959-967, April.
- Krugman, Paul & Venables, Anthony J, 1993. "Integration, Specialization and Adjustment," CEPR Discussion Papers 886, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Lionel Fontagné & Michaël Freudenberg & Nicolas Peridy, 1997. "Trade Patterns Inside the Single Market," Working Papers 1997-07, CEPII research center.
- Rikard Forslid & Ian Wooton, 2003. "Comparative Advantage and the Location of Production," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(4), pages 588-603, 09.
- Forslid, Rikard & Wooton, Ian, 1999. "Comparative Advantage and the Location of Production," CEPR Discussion Papers 2118, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Antonio Ricci, Luca, 1999. "Economic geography and comparative advantage:: Agglomeration versus specialization," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 357-377, February. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mon:ceddtr:54. 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: ()
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.