IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/unm/unumer/2013031.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Measuring performance : does the assessment depend on the poverty proxy?

Author

Listed:
  • Notten, G

    (UNU-MERIT)

Abstract

On 1 January 2005, the international trade in textile and clothing was freed from the quota restrictions that had persisted for more than four decades. This study tests one of the predictions that countries effectively constrained by quotas in the major world markets will increase their exports at the expense of non-quota-constrained suppliers. The focus is on clothing imports of the two major markets, the US and EU-15. These markets are separately analysed as they constitute different lists of quota-constrained countries, QCCs. Unlike others, this study uses a relatively longer data set of post-quota years, which allows us to understand the medium-termadjustment process of exporters following quota removal. We find a large amount ofheterogeneity among the QCCs in their post-quota export performance. Only a few QCCs have benefited at the expense of not only the non-quota countries but also fellow QCCs. The estimates show that almost half of the QCCs were better off under the quota regime at least in terms of exports. The factors most likely to have influenced their heterogeneous performance are also examined.

Suggested Citation

  • Notten, G, 2013. "Measuring performance : does the assessment depend on the poverty proxy?," MERIT Working Papers 031, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
  • Handle: RePEc:unm:unumer:2013031
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.merit.unu.edu/publications/wppdf/2013/wp2013-031.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Coady & Margaret Grosh & John Hoddinott, 2004. "Targeting of Transfers in Developing Countries : Review of Lessons and Experience," World Bank Publications, The World Bank, number 14902.
    2. Zilanawala, Afshin & Pilkauskas, Natasha V., 2012. "Material hardship and child socioemotional behaviors: Differences by types of hardship, timing, and duration," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 814-825.
    3. Irwin Garfinkel & Lee Rainwater & Timothy M. Smeeding, 2006. "A re-examination of welfare states and inequality in rich nations: How in-kind transfers and indirect taxes change the story," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(4), pages 897-919.
    4. Koen Decancq & Tim Goedemé & Karel Van den Bosch & Josefine Vanhille, 2013. "The Evolution of Poverty in the European Union: Concepts, Measurement and Data," ImPRovE Working Papers 13/01, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.
    5. Nolan, Brian & Whelan, Christopher T., 1996. "Resources, Deprivation, and Poverty," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198287858.
    6. Andrea Brandolini & Silvia Magri & Timothy M. Smeeding, 2010. "Asset-based measurement of poverty," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2), pages 267-284.
    7. FUSCO Alessio & GUIO Anne-Catherine & MARLIER Eric, 2011. "Income poverty and material deprivation in European countries," LISER Working Paper Series 2011-04, LISER.
    8. Paulus, Alari & Sutherland, Holly & Tsakloglou, Panos, 2009. "The distributional impact of in kind public benefits in European countries," EUROMOD Working Papers EM10/09, EUROMOD at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    9. Figari, Francesco & Haux, Tina & Matsaganis, Manos & Sutherland, Holly, 2010. "Coverage and adequacy of Minimum Income schemes in the European Union," ISER Working Paper Series 2010-37, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    10. François Bourguignon & Satya Chakravarty, 2003. "The Measurement of Multidimensional Poverty," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 1(1), pages 25-49, April.
    11. Alari Paulus & Holly Sutherland & Panos Tsakloglou, 2010. "The distributional impact of in-kind public benefits in European countries," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2), pages 243-266.
    12. James X. Sullivan & Lesley Turner & Sheldon Danziger, 2008. "The relationship between income and material hardship," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(1), pages 63-81.
    13. Nolan, Brian & Whelan, Christopher T., 2011. "Poverty and Deprivation in Europe," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199588435.
    14. Maria Cancian & Daniel R. Meyer, 2004. "Alternative measures of economic success among TANF participants: Avoiding poverty, hardship, and dependence on public assistance," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(3), pages 531-548.
    15. Wu, Chi-Fang & Eamon, Mary Keegan, 2010. "Does receipt of public benefits reduce material hardship in low-income families with children?," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1262-1270, October.
    16. Robert Breunig & Rebecca McKibbin, 2011. "The effect of survey design on household reporting of financial difficulty," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 174(4), pages 991-1005, October.
    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. Geranda Notten & Anne-Catherine Guio, 2016. "The impact of social transfers on income poverty and material deprivation," ImPRovE Working Papers 16/17, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations; Empirical Studies of Trade; Other Consumer Nondurables;

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F14 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Empirical Studies of Trade
    • L67 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - Other Consumer Nondurables: Clothing, Textiles, Shoes, and Leather Goods; Household Goods; Sports Equipment

    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:unm:unumer:2013031. 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: (Ad Notten). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/meritnl.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.