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

Trade preferences to small developing countries and the welfare costs of lost multilateral liberalization

  • Limao, Nuno
  • Olarreaga, Marcelo

The proliferation of preferential trade liberalization over the past 20 years has raised the question of whether it slows down multilateral trade liberalization. Recent theoretical and empirical evidence indicates this is the case even for unilateral preferences that industrial countries provide to small and poor countries but there is no estimate of the resulting welfare costs. To avoid this stumbling block effect the authors suggest replacing unilateral preferences by a fixed import subsidy. They argue that this scheme would reduce the drag of preferences on multilateral liberalization and generate a Pareto improvement. More important, the authors provide the first estimates of the welfare cost of preferential liberalization as a stumbling block to multilateral liberalization. By combining recent estimates of the stumbling block effect of preferences with data for 170 countries and over 5,000 products they calculate the welfare effects of the United States, European Union, and Japan switching from unilateral preferences to the developing countries to the import subsidy scheme. Even in a model with no dynamic gains to trade the authors find that the switch produces an annual net welfare gain for the 170 countries ($4,354 million) and for each group: the United States, European Union, and Japan ($2,934 million), the developing countries ($520 million), and the rest of the world ($900 million).

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 3565.

in new window

Date of creation: 01 Apr 2005
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:3565
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. André Sapir & Richard Baldwin & Daniel Cohen & Anthony Venables, 1999. "Market integration, regionalism and the global economy," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/8074, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  2. Mattoo, Aaditya & Subramanian, Arvind, 2004. "The WTO and the poorest countries: the stark reality," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(03), pages 385-407, November.
  3. Azam, Jean-Paul & Laffont, Jean-Jacques, 2003. "Contracting for aid," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 25-58, February.
  4. Panagariya, Arvind & Shah, Shekhar & Mishra, Deepak, 2001. "Demand elasticities in international trade: are they really low?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 313-342, April.
  5. Hans P. Lankes & Katerina Alexandraki, 2004. "The Impact of Preference Erosionon Middle-Income Developing Countries," IMF Working Papers 04/169, International Monetary Fund.
  6. Pravin Krishna, 1998. "Regionalism And Multilateralism: A Political Economy Approach," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 113(1), pages 227-250, February.
  7. Limao, Nuno & Venables, Anthony J., 1999. "Infrastructure, geographical disadvantage, and transport costs," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2257, The World Bank.
  8. Karacaovali, Baybars & Limão, Nuno, 2008. "The clash of liberalizations: Preferential vs. multilateral trade liberalization in the European Union," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 299-327, March.
  9. Limão, Nuno, 2005. "Preferential Trade Agreements as Stumbling Blocks for Multilateral Trade Liberalization: Evidence for the US," CEPR Discussion Papers 4884, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  10. Marcelo Olarreaga & Hiau Looi Kee & Alessandro Nicita, 2004. "Estimating Import Demand and Export Supply Elasticities," Econometric Society 2004 North American Summer Meetings 368, Econometric Society.
  11. Chang, Won & Winters, L. Alan, 1999. "How Regional Blocs Affect Excluded Countries: The Price Effects of MERCOSUR," CEPR Discussion Papers 2179, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  12. Kee, Hiau Looi & Nicita, Alessandro & Olarreaga, Marcelo, 2004. "Import Demand Elasticities and Trade Distortions," CEPR Discussion Papers 4669, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  13. Bagwell,K. & Staiger,R.W., 1998. "An economic theory of GATT," Working papers 15, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
  14. Levy, Philip I, 1997. "A Political-Economic Analysis of Free-Trade Agreements," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(4), pages 506-19, September.
  15. André Sapir, 1981. "Trade benefits under the EEC generalized system of preferences," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/8290, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  16. Carlo Perroni & John Whalley, 2000. "The new regionalism: trade liberalization or insurance?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 33(1), pages 1-24, February.
  17. McCulloch, Rachel & Pinera, Jose, 1977. "Trade as Aid: The Political Economy of Tariff Preferences for Developing Countries," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(5), pages 959-67, December.
  18. T.N. Srinivasan, 1999. "Developing Countries in the World Trading System: From GATT, 1947, to the Third Ministerial Meeting of WTO, 1999," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(8), pages 1047-1064, November.
  19. Nuno Limão, 2002. "Are Preferential Trade Agreements with Non-trade Objectives a Stumbling Bloc for Multilateral Liberalization?," International Trade 0206001, EconWPA.
  20. Brown, Drusilla, 1989. "A computational analysis of Japan's generalized system of preferences," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 103-128, January.
  21. Hoekman, Bernard, 2004. "Dismantling Discrimination Against Developing Countries: Access, Rules and Differential Treatment," CEPR Discussion Papers 4694, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  22. Christopher S Adam & Stephen A O'Connell, 2004. "Aid versus Trade Revisited: Donor and Recipient Policies in the Presence of Learning-by-Doing," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(492), pages 150-173, 01.
  23. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 1997. "Regionalism and Multilateral Tariff Cooperation," NBER Working Papers 5921, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
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:3565. 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.