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

Beyond the Uruguay Round : the implications of an Asian free trade area

  • Lewis, Jeffrey D.
  • Robinson, Sherman
  • Zhi Wang

The Pacific Rim members of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) group have different views about the role each should play in fostering further trade liberalization. But at the November 1994 APEC meetings in Bogor they committed themselves to forming an APEC free trade area. The authors explore: 1) the impact of such a free trade area on trade, welfare, and economic structure of the Pacific Rim economies and the European Union; 2) the implications of forming a partial free trade area, excluding such potential partners as China, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) economies, or the United States; 3) whether an APEC free trade area provides more benefits than full trade liberalization that includes the European Union. They analyze these issues using a multicountry, computable general equilibrium model to simulate alternative liberalized trade scenarios. Their findings are as follows. Under the base-case scenario (in which all tariff and most nontariff barriers are removed among the APEC countries, China, Japan, ASEAN, the Asian newly industrializing economies (NIEs), and the United States): all APEC countries gain in GDP and the excluded European Union loses sligthly. Gains are greatest for the poorer countries, for whom trade externalities are more significant. Trade expands greatly, and although there is some trade diversion away from the European Union and the rest of the world, that is swamped by the creation of trade within the free trade area. The U.S.-Japan trade balance improves only slightly (by $1.4 billion), and the U.S.-China balance are much larger, suggesting that changes in sectoral protection make movements in particular bilateral trade balances nearly impossible to predict. When one economy is excluded: there are gains from making the free trade area as broad as possible. Omitting any one region (China, the United States, or the ASEAN 4) makes that region significantly worse off and lowers the gains for all other members as well. The Asian NIEs have the most to gain from broad membership. Excluding China reduces Asian NIE gains by about half, and excluding the United States yields even greater declines. Excluding the United States has the worst impact on all other potential members, greater than the effect of omitting China or the ASEAN 4. The European Union is largely unaffected by different versions of the APEC free trade area. Global (versus regional) liberalization: global liberalization that includes the European Union is the best outcome in terms of world GDP and welfare. And all countries gain more from global liberalization than they do from joining an APEC free trade area alone. Forming a regional free trade area may be politically easier than continued global liberalization, but there are economic incentives for all parties to expand on the completed GATT round.

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-wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/1995/06/01/000009265_3961019112656/Rendered/PDF/multi0page.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by The World Bank in its series Policy Research Working Paper Series with number 1467.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 30 Jun 1995
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:1467
Contact details of provider: Postal: 1818 H Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20433
Phone: (202) 477-1234
Web page: http://www.worldbank.org/
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. Corden, W.M., 1984. "The normative theory of international trade," Handbook of International Economics, in: R. W. Jones & P. B. Kenen (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 2, pages 63-130 Elsevier.
  2. Braga, Carlos A. Primo & Safadi, Raed & Yeats, Alexander, 1994. "NAFTA's Implications for EastAsian exports," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1351, The World Bank.
  3. Richard Harris, 1983. "Applied General Equilibrium Analysis of Small Open Economies with Scale Economies and Imperfect Competition," Working Papers 524, Queen's University, Department of Economics.
  4. de Melo, Jaime & Robinson, Sherman, 1990. "Productivity and externalities : models of export led growth," Policy Research Working Paper Series 387, The World Bank.
  5. John Whalley, 1984. "Trade Liberalization among Major World Trading Areas," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262231204, June.
  6. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521266550 is not listed on IDEAS
  7. Kilkenny, Maureen & Robinson, Sherman, 1990. "Computable General Equilibrium Analysis of Agricultural Liberalization: Factor Mobility and Macro Closure," Staff General Research Papers 11124, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  8. Richard Baldwin, 1989. "The Growth Effects of 1992," NBER Working Papers 3119, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  9. de Melo, Jaime & Robinson, Sherman, 1989. "Product differentiation and the treatment of foreign trade in computable general equilibrium models of small economies," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1-2), pages 47-67, August.
  10. Robinson, Sherman, 1989. "Multisectoral models," Handbook of Development Economics, in: Hollis Chenery & T.N. Srinivasan (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 18, pages 885-947 Elsevier.
  11. Venables, Anthony J., 1985. "Trade and trade policy with imperfect competition: The case of identical products and free entry," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1-2), pages 1-19, August.
  12. J. MUYSKENS & C. de Neubourg, 1986. "Introduction," Discussion Papers (REL - Recherches Economiques de Louvain) 1986031, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
  13. Cox, David & Harris, Richard, 1985. "Trade Liberalization and Industrial Organization: Some Estimates for Canada," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(1), pages 115-45, February.
  14. Brown, Drusilla K., 1987. "Tariffs, the terms of trade, and national product differentiation," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 503-526.
  15. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521319867 is not listed on IDEAS
  16. Devaragan, Shantayanan & Lewis, Jeffrey D. & Robinson, Sherman, 1990. "Policy lessons from trade-focused, two-sector models," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 625-657.
  17. Yoko Sazanami & Shujiro Urata & Hiroki Kawai, 1995. "Measuring the Costs of Protection in Japan," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 32.
  18. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521296762 is not listed on IDEAS
  19. Shoven, John B & Whalley, John, 1984. "Applied General-Equilibrium Models of Taxation and International Trade: An Introduction and Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 22(3), pages 1007-51, September.
  20. Brown, D.K., 1992. "The Impact of a North American Free Trade Area: Applied General Equilibrium Models," Working Papers 311, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
  21. Devarajan, Shantayanan & Rodrik, Dani, 1989. "Trade Liberalization in Developing Countries: Do Imperfect Competition and Scale Economies Matter?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(2), pages 283-87, May.
  22. Hallett Andrew Hughes & Braga C. A. Primo, 1994. "The New Regionalism and the Threat of Protectionism," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 388-421, December.
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:wbk:wbrwps:1467. 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)

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.