IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wbk/wbrwps/1370.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is East Asia less open than North America and the European Economic Community? No

Author

Listed:
  • Dhar, Sumana
  • Panagariya, Arvind

Abstract

To shed light on regional integration schemes in North America and Europe (and on the alleged trading bloc in East Asia), the authors explore the nature of bilateral trade relationships. Using the gravity model, they conduct an econometric analysis of trade flows between major trading countries. They estimate bilateral trade flow equations using a data set for 45 countries over 12 years and then use those equations to study the contribution of trading blocs to intra-regionnal trade. Past investigators have estimated the gravity equation using data for total trade, pooling data across countries. The authors estimate separate equations for the exports and imports of 22 countries (nine in East Asia, six in Europe, three in North America, two in South America, and one in Oceania). Using 27 countries outside of North America, East Asia, and the founding members of the European Union (EEC) as the control countries, the authors test for each region's openness to trade with outside countries. They conclude that: 1) results based on individual-country equations differ greatly from those obtained from pooled, cross-country equations. In some cases, this difference is qualitative. Not surprisingly, in virtually all cases the cross-country equation masks large differences among countries. The coefficient asscociated with distance, for example, varies between -4.4 and -0.4 across the authors'equations. In almost every case the coefficient is statistically significant at a confidence level of 99 percent or more; 2) If there is an intra-regional bias in trade, it is more in North America and among the founding members of the European Union than in East Asia. Canada, the United States, and all countries of the EEC show an intra-regional bias in both exports and imports. In East Asia, on the other hand, exports in six out of nine countries have a statistically significant bias away from intra-regional markets; 3) There is little support for the hypothesis that East Asian markets are closed to trade with outside countries; and 4) Contrary to conventional wisdom, controlling for other variables, many countries export less to North America than to countries outside the three regions. Similiarly, countries outside the EEC export more to the EEC than to countries in the control group.

Suggested Citation

  • Dhar, Sumana & Panagariya, Arvind, 1994. "Is East Asia less open than North America and the European Economic Community? No," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1370, The World Bank.
  • Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:1370
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/1994/10/01/000009265_3970716141841/Rendered/PDF/multi0page.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jeffrey A. Frankel, 1993. "Is Japan Creating a Yen Bloc in East Asia and the Pacific?," NBER Chapters,in: Regionalism and Rivalry: Japan and the United States in Pacific Asia, pages 53-88 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Bergstrand, Jeffrey H, 1985. "The Gravity Equation in International Trade: Some Microeconomic Foundations and Empirical Evidence," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 67(3), pages 474-481, August.
    3. Aitken, Norman D, 1973. "The Effect of the EEC and EFTA on European Trade: A Temporal Cross-Section Analysis," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 63(5), pages 881-892, December.
    4. Paul R. Krugman, 1991. "The move toward free trade zones," Proceedings - Economic Policy Symposium - Jackson Hole, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, pages 7-58.
    5. Thursby, Jerry G & Thursby, Marie C, 1987. "Bilateral Trade Flows, the Linder Hypothesis, and Exchange Risk," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 69(3), pages 488-495, August.
    6. Foroutan, Faezeh & Pritchett, Lant, 1993. "Intra-sub-Saharan African Trade: Is It Too Little?," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies (CSAE), vol. 2(1), pages 74-105, May.
    7. Markusen, James R, 1986. "Explaining the Volume of Trade: An Eclectic Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 1002-1011, December.
    8. Gary R. Saxonhouse, 1993. "Pricing Strategies and Trading Blocs in East Asia," NBER Chapters,in: Regionalism and Rivalry: Japan and the United States in Pacific Asia, pages 89-124 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Deardorff, Alan V., 1984. "Testing trade theories and predicting trade flows," Handbook of International Economics,in: R. W. Jones & P. B. Kenen (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 10, pages 467-517 Elsevier.
    10. Havrylyshyn, Oleh & Pritchett, Lant, 1991. "European trade patterns after the transition," Policy Research Working Paper Series 748, The World Bank.
    11. Panagariya, Arvind, 1993. "Should East Asia go regional? No, no and maybe," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1209, The World Bank.
    12. 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. Dieter Schumacher, 2001. "Market Size and Factor Endowment: Explaining Comparative Advantage in Bilateral Trade by Differences in Income and Per Capita Income," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 259, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    2. Dieter Schumacher & Parvati Tr├╝bswetter, 2000. "Volume and Comparative Advantage in East-West Trade," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 223, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.

    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:wbk:wbrwps:1370. 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: (Roula I. Yazigi). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/dvewbus.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.