IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/qld/uq2004/475.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Who Gains the Most in Preferential Trade Agreements?

Author

Abstract

Using recent extensive data of bilateral trade in manufacturing, we study the relations between trade flows, each country’s technological levels, and geographic barriers. Then, we calibrate the equilibrium of a general equilibrium model to explore how a Trans-Pacific Partnership affects each country’s welfare and trade flows. We decompose the total change of trade flows from member countries into income effects and substitution effects, and investigate the factors that affect trade flows. We demonstrate that a positive coalition externality could exist in that some nonmember countries could gain more than member countries and further investigate under which circumstances it arises.

Suggested Citation

  • Juyoung Cheong & Shino Takayama, 2013. "Who Gains the Most in Preferential Trade Agreements?," Discussion Papers Series 475, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
  • Handle: RePEc:qld:uq2004:475
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.uq.edu.au/economics/abstract/475.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Patrick J. Kehoe & Timothy J. Kehoe, 1994. "Capturing NAFTA's impact with applied general equilibrium models," Quarterly Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, issue Spr, pages 17-34.
    2. Michal Fabinger, 2013. "Trade and Interdependence in a Spatially Complex World," 2013 Meeting Papers 874, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    3. 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.
    4. Burbidge, John B. & James A. DePater & Gordon M. Meyers & Abhijit Sengupta, 1997. "A Coalition-Formation Approach to Equilibrium Federations and Trading Blocs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(5), pages 940-956, December.
    5. Aghion, Philippe & Antras, Pol & Helpman, Elhanan, 2007. "Negotiating free trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 1-30, September.
    6. 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.
    7. Alvarez, Fernando & Lucas, Robert Jr., 2007. "General equilibrium analysis of the Eaton-Kortum model of international trade," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(6), pages 1726-1768, September.
    8. Costas Arkolakis & Arnaud Costinot & Andres Rodriguez-Clare, 2012. "New Trade Models, Same Old Gains?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(1), pages 94-130, February.
    9. Hummels, David & Ishii, Jun & Yi, Kei-Mu, 2001. "The nature and growth of vertical specialization in world trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 75-96, June.
    10. 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.
    11. 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. Juyoung Cheong & Shino Takayama & Terence Yeo, 2013. "Preferential Trade Agreements and Welfare: General Equilibrium Analysis," Discussion Papers Series 482, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.

    More about this item

    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:qld:uq2004:475. 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: (SOE IT). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/decuqau.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.