IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/phd/dpaper/dp_2004-16.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Determinants of Individual Trade Policy Preference in the Philippines

Author

Listed:
  • Pasadilla, Gloria
  • Liao, Christine Marie

Abstract

In a democratic country, economic policies succeed or fail depending on its political support. Open trade policies that were initiated and accepted years ago, in particular, can be reversed, within the limits of the country’s international commitments, depending on the government’s conviction as well as popular pressure. If trade policy were to be subject to a national vote, doubtless, many would show inclination towards greater protectionism. Using ISSP survey data for the Philippines, the paper examines factors that affect individual preferences towards more protectionism as well as towards greater trade liberalization. It finds, surprisingly, that years of education, economic class, employment in public sector, and urban population negatively correlate with pro-trade attitude. In the case of the negative relation of years of education with pro-trade preference, the authors argue that this has its justification in the Hecksher-Ohlin-Samuelson model of trade and factor returns.

Suggested Citation

  • Pasadilla, Gloria & Liao, Christine Marie, 2004. "Determinants of Individual Trade Policy Preference in the Philippines," Discussion Papers DP 2004-16, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    • Handle: RePEc:phd:dpaper:dp_2004-16
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.pids.gov.ph/publication/discussion-papers/determinants-of-individual-trade-policy-preference-in-the-philippines
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leamer, Edward E. & Levinsohn, James, 1995. "International trade theory: The evidence," Handbook of International Economics, in: G. M. Grossman & K. Rogoff (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 26, pages 1339-1394, Elsevier.
    2. Davis, Donald, 1996. "Trade Liberalization And Income Distribution," Harvard Institute for International Development (HIID) Papers 294371, Harvard University, Kennedy School of Government.
    3. Cororaton, Caesar B., 2003. "Analyzing the Impact of Trade Reforms on Welfare and Income Distribution Using CGE Framework: The Case of the Philippines," Discussion Papers DP 2003-01, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    4. Jones, Ronald W. & Peter Neary, J., 1984. "The positive theory of international trade," Handbook of International Economics, in: R. W. Jones & P. B. Kenen (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 1, pages 1-62, Elsevier.
    5. Aniceto C. Orbeta Jr., 2002. "The impact of globalization on employment in the Philippines," Philippine Review of Economics, University of the Philippines School of Economics and Philippine Economic Society, vol. 39(2), pages 1-36, December.
    6. Edward J. Balistreri, 1997. "The Performance of the Heckscher-Ohlin-Vanek Model in Predicting Endogenous Policy Forces at the Individual Level," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 30(1), pages 1-17, February.
    7. Donald R. Davis, 1996. "Trade Liberalization and Income Distribution," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1769, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
    8. G. M. Grossman & K. Rogoff (ed.), 1995. "Handbook of International Economics," Handbook of International Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 3, number 3.
    9. Kevin H. O'Rourke, 2003. "Heckscher-Ohlin Theory and Individual Attitudes Towards Globalization," The Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper Series iiisdp07, IIIS.
    10. Scheve, Kenneth F. & Slaughter, Matthew J., 2001. "What determines individual trade-policy preferences?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 267-292, August.
    11. Wolfgang F. Stolper & Paul A. Samuelson, 1941. "Protection and Real Wages," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 9(1), pages 58-73.
    12. Rogowski, Ronald, 1987. "Political Cleavages and Changing Exposure to Trade," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 81(4), pages 1121-1137, December.
    13. K. H. O'Rourke & R. Sinnott, 2001. "The Determinants of Individual Trade Policy Preferences: International Survey Evidence," CEG Working Papers 20016, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
    14. repec:rus:hseeco:121615 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Orbeta, Aniceto Jr. C., 2002. "Globalization and Employment: The Impact of Trade on Employment Level and Structure in the Philippines," Discussion Papers DP 2002-04, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    16. Rodrik, Dani, 1995. "Political economy of trade policy," Handbook of International Economics, in: G. M. Grossman & K. Rogoff (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 28, pages 1457-1494, Elsevier.
    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. Teng, Faxin, 2008. "Warum sind manche Individuen und Länder protektionistischer als andere? [Why Are Some People and Countries More Protectionist than Others?]," MPRA Paper 31958, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Ina Jäkel & Marcel Smolka, 2013. "Individual Attitudes Towards Trade: Stolper-Samuelson Revisited," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 731-761, September.
    2. Teng, Faxin, 2008. "Warum sind manche Individuen und Länder protektionistischer als andere? [Why Are Some People and Countries More Protectionist than Others?]," MPRA Paper 31958, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Mayda, Anna Maria & Rodrik, Dani, 2005. "Why are some people (and countries) more protectionist than others?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 1393-1430, August.
    4. K. H. O'Rourke & R. Sinnott, 2001. "The Determinants of Individual Trade Policy Preferences: International Survey Evidence," Trinity Economics Papers 200110, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
    5. Eddy LEE & Marco VIVARELLI, 2006. "The social impact of globalization in the developing countries," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 145(3), pages 167-184, September.
    6. Magee, Christopher S.P. & Davidson, Carl & Matusz, Steven J., 2005. "Trade, turnover, and tithing," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 157-176, May.
    7. Daniel Ortega & Francisco Rodríguez, 2005. "Trade Policy and Factor Prices: An Empirical Strategy," Wesleyan Economics Working Papers 2005-004, Wesleyan University, Department of Economics.
    8. Murard, Elie, 2017. "Less Welfare or Fewer Foreigners? Immigrant Inflows and Public Opinion towards Redistribution and Migration Policy," IZA Discussion Papers 10805, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Hainmueller, Jens & Hiscox, Michael J., 2006. "Learning to Love Globalization: Education and Individual Attitudes Toward International Trade," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 60(2), pages 469-498, April.
    10. Bruce A. Blonigen & Jacob McGrew, 2014. "Task Routineness and Trade Policy Preferences," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 505-518, November.
    11. Anna Maria Mayda, 2006. "Who Is Against Immigration? A Cross-Country Investigation of Individual Attitudes toward Immigrants," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(3), pages 510-530, August.
    12. Thierry Verdier, 2005. "Intégration commerciale « socialement responsable » : une approche en termes d'économie politique," Revue d’économie du développement, De Boeck Université, vol. 13(4), pages 55-121.
    13. Eugene Beaulieu & Christopher Magee, 2004. "Four Simple Tests of Campaign Contributions and Trade Policy Preferences," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(2), pages 163-187, July.
    14. Pushan Dutt & Devashish Mitra, 2016. "Endogenous trade policy through majority voting: an empirical investigation," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Political Economy of Trade Policy Theory, Evidence and Applications, chapter 4, pages 67-93, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    15. Rodríguez Chatruc, Marisol & Stein, Ernesto H. & Vlaicu, Razvan, 2019. "Trade Attitudes in Latin America: Evidence from a Multi-Country Survey Experiment," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 9603, Inter-American Development Bank.
    16. Rodríguez Chatruc, Marisol & Stein, Ernesto & Vlaicu, Razvan, 2021. "How issue framing shapes trade attitudes: Evidence from a multi-country survey experiment," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    17. repec:eee:labchp:v:3:y:1999:i:pb:p:2215-2288 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Eleydiane Maria Gomes Vale & João Mário De Franç, 2014. "Cones De Diversificação E Comércio Exterior: Uma Análise Sobre Diferenças Salariais E Competitividade Industrial No Nordeste E Sudeste Do Brasil," Anais do XLI Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 41st Brazilian Economics Meeting] 109, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    19. Robert C. Feenstra, 1998. "Integration of Trade and Disintegration of Production in the Global Economy," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 31-50, Fall.
    20. Sampson, Thomas, 2016. "Assignment reversals: Trade, skill allocation and wage inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 365-409.
    21. Gordon H. Hanson & Kenneth Scheve & Matthew J. Slaughter, 2007. "Public Finance And Individual Preferences Over Globalization Strategies," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(1), pages 1-33, March.

    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:phd:dpaper:dp_2004-16. 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: Aniceto Orbeta (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/pidgvph.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.