IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/6461.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Value of MFN Treatment

Author

Listed:
  • Madanmohan Ghosh
  • Carlo Perroni
  • John Whalley

Abstract

We discuss most favoured nation (MFN) treatment in trade agreements, suggesting that its value to individual countries depends critically on the relevant model solution concept used to evaluate it. We analyze both rights to MFN treatment in foreign markets, and the obligation to grant MFN treatment in home markets; the heart of the post-war GATT/WTO multilateral trading system. In a traditional competitive equilibrium framework, MFN gives benefits to small countries in being able to free ride on bilateral tariff concessions exchanged between larger countries in GATT/WTO negotiating rounds. In a non-cooperative Nash equilibrium framework, MFN restrains retaliatory actions to be non-discriminatory. In a co-operative bargaining framework in which trade policies are jointly set, MFN changes the threat point and hence affects the bargaining solution. We use a calibrated numerical model of global trade in which we compute all three solution concepts and compare MFN and non MFN equilibria for each. We use the GTAP (1992) data base, concluding that quantitatively the most significant effect of MFN seems to be in its impact on bargaining rather than on competitive and Nash equilibrium solutions; being beneficial to smaller countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Madanmohan Ghosh & Carlo Perroni & John Whalley, 1998. "The Value of MFN Treatment," NBER Working Papers 6461, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:6461
    Note: ITI
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w6461.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baldwin, R E & Murray, Tracy, 1977. "MFN Tariff Reductions and Developing Country Trade Benefits under the GSP," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 87(345), pages 30-46, March.
    2. Sang-Seung, Yi, 1996. "Endogenous formation of customs unions under imperfect competition: open regionalism is good," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1-2), pages 153-177, August.
    3. Kuga, Kiyoshi, 1973. "Tariff retaliation and policy equilibrium," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 351-366, November.
    4. Carlo Perroni & John Whalley, 2000. "The new regionalism: trade liberalization or insurance?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(1), pages 1-24, February.
    5. Hamilton, Bob & Whalley, John, 1983. "Optimal tariff calculations in alternative trade models and some possible implications for current world trading arrangements," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3-4), pages 323-348, November.
    6. Perroni, Carlo & Whalley, John, 1996. "How Severe Is Global Retaliation Risk under Increasing Regionalism?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(2), pages 57-61, May.
    7. Bond, Eric W. & Syropoulos, Constantinos, 1996. "The size of trading blocs Market power and world welfare effects," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(3-4), pages 411-437, May.
    8. Rodney D. Ludema, 1998. "On the Value of Preferential Trade Agreements in Multilateral Negotiations," International Trade 9802003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Robert M. Stern & Jonathan Francis & Bruce Schumacher, 1976. "Price Elasticities in International Trade," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-349-03137-5.
    10. Kalai, Ehud & Smorodinsky, Meir, 1975. "Other Solutions to Nash's Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 43(3), pages 513-518, May.
    11. Shoven,John B. & Whalley,John, 1992. "Applying General Equilibrium," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521266550.
    12. Dawkins, Christina & Srinivasan, T.N. & Whalley, John, 2001. "Calibration," Handbook of Econometrics, in: J.J. Heckman & E.E. Leamer (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 58, pages 3653-3703, Elsevier.
    13. John Whalley, 1984. "Trade Liberalization among Major World Trading Areas," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262231204, December.
    14. Jon D. Haveman, 1996. "Some Welfare Effects of Sequential Customs Union Formation," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 29(4), pages 941-958, November.
    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. Horn, Henrik & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2001. "Economic and legal aspects of the Most-Favored-Nation clause," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 233-279, June.
    2. Nuno Limão, 2018. "Are Preferential Trade Agreements with Non-trade Objectives a Stumbling Block for Multilateral Liberalization?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Policy Externalities and International Trade Agreements, chapter 10, pages 283-317, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Ghosh, Madanmohan, 2002. "The revival of regional trade arrangements: a GE evaluation of the impact on small countries," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 83-101, May.
    4. Bhattarai K., 2001. "Welfare Gains to UK from a Global Free Trade," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(3-4), pages 55-72, July - De.
    5. John Whalley, 2000. "What Can The Developing Countries Infer Fromthe Uruguay Round Models For Future Negotiations," UNCTAD Blue Series Papers 4, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.

    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. Dan A. Black & Mark C. Berger & Jeffrey A. Smith & Brett J. Noel, 1999. "Is the Threat of Training More Effective Than Training Itself? Experimental Evidence from the UI System," University of Western Ontario, Departmental Research Report Series 9907, University of Western Ontario, Department of Economics.
    2. Ghosh, Madanmohan, 2002. "The revival of regional trade arrangements: a GE evaluation of the impact on small countries," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 83-101, May.
    3. He, Chuantian & Li, Chunding & Wang, Jing & Whalley, John, 2017. "The Armington assumption and the size of optimal tariffs," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 214-222.
    4. Chunding Li & John Whalley & Chuantian He & Chuangwei Lin, 2021. "The 2008 Financial Crisis and the Lack of Retaliatory Trade Intervention," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 67(1), pages 78-105.
    5. Ana María Iregui, 2000. "Efficiency Gains From The Elimination Of Global Restrictions On Labour Mobility: An Analysis Using A Multiregional Cge Model," Borradores de Economia 2435, Banco de la Republica.
    6. Chunding Li, 2017. "How Would Bilateral Trade Retaliation Affect China?," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 49(3), pages 459-479, March.
    7. Winters, L. Alan, 1996. "Regionalism versus Multilateralism," CEPR Discussion Papers 1525, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Mette Ersbak Bang Nielsen, 2006. "The endogenous formation of sustanaible trade agreements," Revista de Economía del Rosario, Universidad del Rosario, June.
    9. Mark Melatos & Alan Woodland, 2009. "Common External Tariff Choice in Core Customs Unions," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(SI), pages 292-303, May.
    10. Trela, Irene & Whalley, John, 1995. "Internal Quota-Allocation Schemes and the Costs of the MFA," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(3), pages 284-306, October.
    11. Ralph Ossa, 2011. "A "New Trade" Theory of GATT/WTO Negotiations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 119(1), pages 122-152.
    12. Bond, Eric W. & Syropoulos, Constantinos & Winters, L. Alan, 2001. "Deepening of regional integration and multilateral trade agreements," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 335-361, April.
    13. Mario Larch & Wolfgang Lechthaler, 2013. "Whom to send to Doha? The Short-sighted Ones!," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 16(4), pages 634-649, October.
    14. Schmidt, Tobias F. N. & Koschel, Henrike, 1998. "Modelling of foreign trade in applied general equilibrium models: theoretical approaches and sensitivity analysis with the GEM-E3 model," ZEW Discussion Papers 98-08, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    15. Ralph Ossa, 2016. "Quantitative Models of Commercial Policy," NBER Working Papers 22062, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Richard Baldwin, 2008. "Big-Think Regionalism: A Critical Survey," NBER Working Papers 14056, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Bekkers, Eddy & Francois, Joseph & Rojas-Romagosa, Hugo, 2019. "Trade Wars: Nobody Expects the Spanish Inquisition," Papers 1234, World Trade Institute.
    18. Carlo Perroni & John Whalley, 2000. "The new regionalism: trade liberalization or insurance?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(1), pages 1-24, February.
    19. Furusawa, Taiji & Konishi, Hideo, 2007. "Free trade networks," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 310-335, July.
    20. Antoni Estevadeordal & Kati Suominen, 2008. "Sequencing Regional Trade Integration and Cooperation Agreements," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 112-140, January.

    More about this item

    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:nbr:nberwo:6461. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.