IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper

Can Trade Agreements Curtail Trade Creation and Prevent Trade Diversion

Despite recent theoretical literature highlighting the cross effects between preferential trade agreements (PTAs), like the domino effect and the competitive liberalization theory, little has been done to quantify their impact on bilateral trade flows. This paper investigates how preexisting PTAs dilute (shield) the trade creation (diversion) effect of new PTAs. Countries having pre-existing PTAs enjoy smaller gains in intra-bloc trade because of the dilution effect, and experience smaller losses or even gains in extra-bloc trade because of the shielding effect. The findings support the proposition that PTAs could be used to fend off future trade diversion.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.uq.edu.au/economics/abstract/500.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia in its series Discussion Papers Series with number 500.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 08 Feb 2014
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:qld:uq2004:500
Contact details of provider: Postal:
St. Lucia, Qld. 4072

Phone: +61 7 3365 6570
Fax: +61 7 3365 7299
Web page: http://www.uq.edu.au/economics/
Email:


More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
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.:

as in new window
  1. 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.
  2. Saggi, Kamal & Yildiz, Halis Murat, 2009. "Bilateralism, multilateralism, and the quest for global free trade," MPRA Paper 17558, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  3. Baldwin, Richard & Taglioni, Daria, 2006. "Gravity for Dummies and Dummies for Gravity Equations," CEPR Discussion Papers 5850, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  4. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2001. "Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to the Border Puzzle," NBER Working Papers 8079, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. Sanjeev Goyal & Sumit Joshi, 2006. "Bilateralism And Free Trade," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 47(3), pages 749-778, 08.
  6. Bagwell, Kyle & Staiger, Robert W., 2004. "Multilateral trade negotiations, bilateral opportunism and the rules of GATT/WTO," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 1-29, May.
  7. Roy, Jayjit, 2011. "Is the WTO mystery really solved?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 127-130.
  8. Chen, Maggie & Joshi, Sumit, 2010. "Third-Country Effects on the Formation of Free Trade Agreements," MPRA Paper 23507, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  9. Andrew K. Rose, 2002. "Do We Really KNow that the WTO Increases Trade?," Working Papers 182002, Hong Kong Institute for Monetary Research.
  10. Rubinstein, Yona & Helpman, Elhanan & Melitz, Marc, 2008. "Estimating Trade Flows: Trading Partners and Trading Volumes," Scholarly Articles 3228230, Harvard University Department of Economics.
  11. Baier, Scott L. & Bergstrand, Jeffrey H., 2009. "Bonus vetus OLS: A simple method for approximating international trade-cost effects using the gravity equation," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 77-85, February.
  12. Jong-Wha Lee & Innwon Park & Kwanho Shin, 2005. "Proliferating Regional Trade Arrangements: Why and Whither?," International Trade 0501010, EconWPA.
  13. Richard Baldwin & Dany Jaimovich, 2010. "Are Free Trade Agreements Contagious?," NBER Working Papers 16084, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  14. J. M. C. Santos Silva & Silvana Tenreyro, 2006. "The Log of Gravity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(4), pages 641-658, November.
  15. Egger, Peter & Larch, Mario, 2008. "Interdependent preferential trade agreement memberships: An empirical analysis," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 384-399, December.
  16. Hur, Jung & Alba, Joseph D. & Park, Donghyun, 2010. "Effects of Hub-and-Spoke Free Trade Agreements on Trade: A Panel Data Analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1105-1113, August.
  17. Santos Silva, Joao M C & Tenreyro, Silvana, 2009. "Further simulation evidence on the performance of the Poisson pseudo-maximum likelihood estimator," Economics Discussion Papers 3546, University of Essex, Department of Economics.
  18. Richard Baldwin, 1993. "A Domino Theory of Regionalism," NBER Working Papers 4465, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  19. Xuepeng Liu, 2009. "GATT/WTO Promotes Trade Strongly: Sample Selection and Model Specification," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(3), pages 428-446, 08.
  20. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 1993. "Multilateral Tariff Cooperation During the Formation of Free Trade Areas," Discussion Papers 1048, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
  21. George Deltas & Klaus Desmet & Giovanni Facchini, 2012. "Hub-and-spoke free trade areas: Theory and evidence from Israel," Working Papers 2012-01, Instituto Madrileño de Estudios Avanzados (IMDEA) Ciencias Sociales.
  22. Scott L. Baier & Jeffrey H. Bergstrand, 2005. "Do free trade agreements actually increase members’ international trade?," FRB Atlanta Working Paper 2005-03, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
  23. Kowalczyk, Carsten, 2000. "Welfare and Integration," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 41(2), pages 483-94, May.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:qld:uq2004:500. 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)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.