IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/32815.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How much do agreements matter for services trade?

Author

Listed:
  • Shingal, ANIRUDH

Abstract

With an increasing number of Preferential Trade Agreements (PTAs) covering trade in services, we explore the impact of PTAs on services trade. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first paper in this literature that endogenizes the impact of preferentialism in estimating the trade effect. We also add to this literature by distilling the trade effect of PTAs into that emanating from services and “goods only” agreements and further confirm complementarities between the two. Moreover, we study these relationships disaggregated by the economic status of the partner countries and by the reciprocity of commitments. Our results suggest trade effects of 11.6 – 12.7% from having a services accord alone. They also reveal that the underlying services trade between countries has been driven as much by IRS as by factor differences and that asymmetric trade alliance between North-South partners has been successful in fostering inter-industry trade.

Suggested Citation

  • Shingal, ANIRUDH, 2009. "How much do agreements matter for services trade?," MPRA Paper 32815, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 15 May 2010.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:32815
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/32815/1/MPRA_paper_32815.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/39436/1/MPRA_paper_39436.pdf
    File Function: revised version
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Céline CARRERE, 2003. "Revisiting the Effects of Regional Trading Agreements on trade flows with Proper Specification of the Gravity Model," Working Papers 200310, CERDI.
    2. 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.
    3. Carolina Lennon, 2008. "Trade in services and trade in goods: differences and complementarities," PSE Working Papers halshs-00586223, HAL.
    4. Hausman, Jerry A & Taylor, William E, 1981. "Panel Data and Unobservable Individual Effects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(6), pages 1377-1398, November.
    5. I-Hui Cheng & Howard J. Wall, 2005. "Controlling for heterogeneity in gravity models of trade and integration," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue Jan, pages 49-63.
    6. Boriss Siliverstovs & Dieter Schumacher, 2009. "Estimating gravity equations: to log or not to log?," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 645-669, June.
    7. Keith Walsh, 2006. "Trade in Services: Does Gravity Hold? A Gravity Model Approach to Estimating Barriers to Services Trade," The Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper Series iiisdp183, IIIS.
    8. Magee Christopher S, 2003. "Endogenous Preferential Trade Agreements: An Empirical Analysis," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 1-19, December.
    9. Arjan Lejour & J.W. de Paiva Verheijden, 2004. "Services trade within Canada and the European Union; what do they have in common?," CPB Discussion Paper 42, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    10. Fukunari Kimura & Hyun-Hoon Lee, 2006. "The Gravity Equation in International Trade in Services," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 142(1), pages 92-121, April.
    11. 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.
    12. Egger, Hartmut & Egger, Peter & Greenaway, David, 2008. "The trade structure effects of endogenous regional trade agreements," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 278-298, March.
    13. Robert C. Feenstra & James R. Markusen & Andrew K. Rose, 2001. "Using the gravity equation to differentiate among alternative theories of trade," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 34(2), pages 430-447, May.
    14. Peter Egger, 2005. "Alternative Techniques for Estimation of Cross-Section Gravity Models," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(5), pages 881-891, November.
    15. Baier, Scott L. & Bergstrand, Jeffrey H., 2004. "Economic determinants of free trade agreements," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 29-63, October.
    16. Peter Egger, 2002. "An Econometric View on the Estimation of Gravity Models and the Calculation of Trade Potentials," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 297-312, February.
    17. 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.
    18. Evenett, Simon J, 2002. "The Impact of Economic Sanctions on South African Exports," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 49(5), pages 557-573, December.
    19. Anderson, James E, 1979. "A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 106-116, March.
    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. repec:idb:idbbks:6668 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Erik Marel & Ben Shepherd, 2013. "Services Trade, Regulation and Regional Integration: Evidence from Sectoral Data," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(11), pages 1393-1405, November.
    3. Egger, Peter & Shingal, Anirudh, 2014. "Determinants of services trade agreements," Papers 721, World Trade Institute.
    4. van der Marel, Erik, 2011. "Determinants of comparative advantage in services," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 38993, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Sauvé, Pierre & Shingal, Anirudh, 2014. "Why do Countries enter into Preferential Agreements on Trade in Services? Assessing the Potential for Negotiated Regulatory Convergence in Asian Services Markets," Working Papers on Regional Economic Integration 129, Asian Development Bank.
    6. SAHOO, Pravakar & KUMAR DASH, Ranjan, 2014. "India's surge in Modern Services Exports: Empirics for policy," Working Papers 2014010, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Applied Economics.
    7. Sahoo, Pravakar & Dash, Ranjan Kumar, 2014. "India's surge in modern services exports: Empirics for policy," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 1082-1100.
    8. Bianka Dettmer, 2012. "The European Union's service directive: Contrasting ex ante estimates with empirical evidence," Jena Economic Research Papers 2012-019, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    9. Nianli Zhou & John Whalley, 2014. "How Do the "GATS-Plus" and "GATS-Minus" Characteristics of Regional Service Agreements Affect Trade in Services?," NBER Working Papers 20551, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Shingal, Anirudh, 2014. "Exploring complementarities between goods and services trade in trade agreements," Papers 834, World Trade Institute.
    11. Shingal, Anirudh, 2013. "Revisiting the trade effects of services agreements," MPRA Paper 51243, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. repec:bla:worlde:v:40:y:2017:i:2:p:439-461 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Juan S. Blyde & Christian Volpe Martincus & Danielken Molina, 2014. "Fábricas sincronizadas: América Latina y el Caribe en la era de las Cadenas Globales de Valor," IDB Publications (Books), Inter-American Development Bank, number 86755 edited by Juan S. Blyde, February.
    14. Egger, Peter & Larch, Mario & Staub, Kevin E, 2012. "Trade Preferences and Bilateral Trade in Goods and Services: A Structural Approach," CEPR Discussion Papers 9051, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Services trade; RTAs; gravity model; endogeneity; North-South;

    JEL classification:

    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F10 - International Economics - - Trade - - - General

    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:pra:mprapa:32815. 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: (Joachim Winter) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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 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.

    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.