IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Trade policy options for Chile : a quantitative evaluation

  • Harrison, Glenn W.
  • Rutherford, Thomas F.
  • Tarr, David G.

Chile is currently evaluating a wide range of possible trade policies. Using a global computable general equilibrium model, the authors examine a range of trade policy and complementary tax policy options for Chile. They focus on Chile's principal preferential trade policy options: a free-trade area with MERCOSUR, a customs union with MERCOSUR, and a free trade area with NAFTA. They also examine such options as complementary tariff reduction with nonpartner countries in combination with implementing the free trade area options; unilateral or global trade liberalization; and the optimum unilateral tariff. Their principal policy conclusions: lowering Chile's tariffs preferentially or multilaterally leads to only small gains as Chile starts with a rather efficient external trade regime, uniform tariffs of 11 percent. Largely because of its efficient uniform tariff, preferential tariff reduction will reduce Chilean welfare through trade diversion, unless Chile can improve its access in the markets of partner countries. NAFTA offers enough access to benefit Chile; MERCOSUR does not, once the trade diversion costs of MERCOSUR are taken into account. Under their preferred-elasticity scenario, Chile can convert the MERCOSUR agreement from a loss to a gain if it lowers its external tariff to between 6 and 8 percent. Doing so will also increase the gains from a potential agreement with NAFTA. Chile's current value-added tax imposes distortionary costs because collection rates are nor uniform. Chile will gain if it can collect the VAT more uniformly. Tariff reductions from trade reform will require an increase in domestic taxes, so greater uniformity in domestic taxes (less distortion in replacement taxes) will maximize the benefits from trade reform. Welfare will be improved by moving toward unifromity in the VAT and lowering the Chilean tariff to between 6 and 8 percent. This model ignores dynamic gains from trade liberalization, the result of importing either a greater variety of products or more technologically advanced products.

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:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by The World Bank in its series Policy Research Working Paper Series with number 1783.

in new window

Date of creation: 30 Jun 1997
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:1783
Contact details of provider: Postal: 1818 H Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20433
Phone: (202) 477-1234
Web page:

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. Harrison, Glenn W. & Jones, Richard & Kimbell, Larry J. & Wigle, Randal, 1993. "How robust is applied general equilibrium analysis?," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 99-115, February.
  2. Clinton R. Shiells & Kenneth A. Reinert, 1993. "Armington Models and Terms-of-Trade Effects: Some Econometric Evidence for North America," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 299-316, May.
  3. Harrison, Glenn W & Rutherford, Thomas F & Wooton, Ian, 1991. "An Empirical Database for a General Equilibrium Model of the European Communities," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 95-120.
  4. Harrison, Glenn W & Rutherford, Thomas F & Tarr, David G, 1997. "Quantifying the Uruguay Round," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(444), pages 1405-30, September.
  5. Hammond, Peter J & Sempere, Jaime, 1995. "Limits to the Potential Gains from Economic Integration and Other Supply Side Policies," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(432), pages 1180-1204, September.
  6. Harberger, Arnold C, 1971. "Three Basic Postulates for Applied Welfare Economics: An Interpretive Essay," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 785-97, September.
  7. Wonnacott, Paul & Wonnacott, Ronald, 1981. "Is Unilateral Tariff Reduction Preferable to a Customs Union? The Curious Case of the Missing Foreign Tariffs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(4), pages 704-14, September.
  8. Harrison, Glenn W & Vinod, H D, 1992. "The Sensitivity Analysis of Applied General Equilibrium Models: Completely Randomized Factorial Sampling Designs," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 74(2), pages 357-62, May.
  9. Valdes, A, 1996. "Surveillance of Agricultural Price and Trade Policy in Latin America during Major Policy Reform," World Bank - Discussion Papers 349, World Bank.
  10. Reinert, Kenneth A. & Roland-Holst, David W., 1992. "Armington elasticities for United States manufacturing sectors," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 14(5), pages 631-639, October.
  11. Harrison, Glenn W & Rutherford, Thomas F & Wooton, Ian, 1989. "The Economic Impact of the European Community," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(2), pages 288-94, May.
  12. Harrison, Glenn W. & Rutherford, Thomas F. & Tarr, David G., 1997. "Economic implications for Turkey of a Customs Union with the European Union," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(3-5), pages 861-870, April.
  13. Harrison, Glenn W & Rutherford, Thomas F & Tarr, David G, 1993. "Trade Reform in the Partially Liberalized Economy of Turkey," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 7(2), pages 191-217, May.
  14. Athukorala, Premachandra & Riedel, James, 1994. "Demand and Supply Factors in the Determination of NIE Exports: A Simultaneous Error-Correction Model for Hong Kong: A Comment," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 104(427), pages 1411-14, November.
  15. Miller, Marcus H & Spencer, John E, 1977. "The Static Economic Effects of the UK Joining the EEC: A General Equilibrium Approach," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(1), pages 71-93, February.
  16. Juan Eduardo Coeymans & Felipe Larraín, 1994. "Efectos de un Acuerdo de Libre Comercio entre Chile y Estados Unidos: Un Enfoque de Equilibrio General," Latin American Journal of Economics-formerly Cuadernos de Economía, Instituto de Economía. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile., vol. 31(94), pages 357-400.
  17. Shah, Anwar & Whalley, John, 1991. "Tax Incidence Analysis of Developing Countries: An Alternative View," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 5(3), pages 535-52, September.
  18. Bond, Eric, 1997. "Using tariff indices to evaluate preferential trading arrangements : an application to Chile," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1751, The World Bank.
  19. Wooton, Ian, 1986. "Preferential trading agreements: An investigation," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1-2), pages 81-97, August.
  20. Riedel, James, 1988. "The Demand for LDC Exports of Manufactures: Estimates from Hong Kong," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(389), pages 138-48, March.
  21. Glenn W. Harrison & Thomas F. Rutherford & Ian Wooton, 1993. "An Alternative Welfare Decomposition for Customs Unions," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 26(4), pages 961-68, November.
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:1783. 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.