IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Essays in Indian trade policy

Listed author(s):
  • Saha, Amrita

My thesis explores the political economy of trade protection in India. The first essay outlines the political economy of trade protection in India. My second essay asks: Has Protection really been for Sale in India? To answer this question, I use a unique dataset to explain the political economy of trade protection since liberalisation. The traditional Grossman and Helpman (1992) (GH henceforth) model of Protection for Sale (PFS henceforth) is used with a new measure of political organization. I undertake cross-sectional analysis for several years from 1990-2007 and use the pooled dataset. The third essay outlines the modified PFS framework that introduces a new measure of lobbying effectiveness to analyse how heterogeneity in lobbying affects trade protection. The underlying framework is based on the idea that government preferences or the market structure of the industry can influence lobbying effectiveness. The empirical evidence provides estimates on effectiveness and examines its determinants. The fourth essay explores: Is Protection still for Sale with Lobbying Effectiveness? I undertake an estimation of the modified PFS model against the conventional results presented in my second essay. I examine if differences in lobbying effectiveness can explain the variation in tariff protection levels across Indian manufacturing sectors and construct a direct measure of lobbying effectiveness for Indian manufacturing. Finally, I include additional political factors of importance to Indian trade policy. The fifth essay asks: Join Hands or Walk Alone? I examine the factors that affect the choice of lobbying strategy of Indian manufacturing firms for trade policy and consider the exclusive use of a single strategy, to lobby collectively (Join hands) and lobby individually (Walk Alone), along with the possibility of a dual strategy i.e. a combination of collective and individual lobbying using information from a primary survey across 146 firms. The results are new for India and reveal the overall preference of a dual lobbying strategy.

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://sro.sussex.ac.uk/65085/1/Saha%2C%20Amrita.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Department of Economics, University of Sussex in its series Economics PhD Theses with number 1016.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Oct 2016
Handle: RePEc:sus:susphd:1016
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Jubilee Building G08, Falmer, Brighton, BN1 9SL

Phone: +44 (0) 1273 678889
Fax: +44 (0)1273 873715
Web page: http://www.sussex.ac.uk/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. Nirvikar Singh & Xavier Vives, 1984. "Price and Quantity Competition in a Differentiated Duopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(4), pages 546-554, Winter.
  2. Phillip McCalman, 2004. "Protection for Sale and Trade Liberalization: an Empirical Investigation," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(1), pages 81-94, February.
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:sus:susphd:1016. 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: (Russell Eke)

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.