IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/maxpod/213.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Gauging the gravity of the situation: The use and abuse of expertise in estimating the economic costs of Brexit

Author

Listed:
  • Semken, Christoph
  • Hay, Colin

Abstract

HM Treasury's estimation of the economic consequences of Brexit - using standard macroeconomic models - during the EU referendum campaign represents a remarkable intervention in a highly politicized public debate. It raises a series of questions about the use of economic expertise. Through a detailed theoretical and empirical critique of the Treasury's methodology - and a reassessment of the likely effects of Brexit in light of this - we cast doubt on the utility of their approach, highlighting methodological issues, unrealistic assumptions, and misrepresentations of established facts. In the process we seek to identify some of the wider implications for the use and potential abuse of economic expertise in highly charged political contexts, such as the EU referendum debate.

Suggested Citation

  • Semken, Christoph & Hay, Colin, 2021. "Gauging the gravity of the situation: The use and abuse of expertise in estimating the economic costs of Brexit," MaxPo Discussion Paper Series 21/3, Max Planck Sciences Po Center on Coping with Instability in Market Societies (MaxPo).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:maxpod:213
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/249446/1/178716599X.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mario Larch & Joschka Wanner & Yoto V. Yotov & Thomas Zylkin, 2017. "The Currency Union Effect: A PPML Re-assessment with High-Dimensional Fixed Effects," CESifo Working Paper Series 6464, CESifo.
    2. David Buehler & Roger White, 2015. "A simple solution to the distance puzzle: balanced data and Poisson estimation," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(7), pages 587-592, May.
    3. Gabriel Zucman, 2013. "The Missing Wealth of Nations: Are Europe and the U.S. net Debtors or net Creditors?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 128(3), pages 1321-1364.
    4. Head, Keith & Mayer, Thierry & Ries, John, 2010. "The erosion of colonial trade linkages after independence," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 1-14, May.
    5. Stein, Ernesto & Daude, Christian, 2007. "Longitude matters: Time zones and the location of foreign direct investment," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 96-112, March.
    6. Wooldridge, Jeffrey M., 1997. "Multiplicative Panel Data Models Without the Strict Exogeneity Assumption," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(5), pages 667-678, October.
    7. Wooldridge, Jeffrey M., 1999. "Distribution-free estimation of some nonlinear panel data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 77-97, May.
    8. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, April.
    9. Glick, Reuven & Rose, Andrew K., 2016. "Currency unions and trade: A post-EMU reassessment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 78-91.
    10. Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), 2014. "Handbook of International Economics," Handbook of International Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 4, number 4.
    11. repec:hal:pseose:halshs-01053616 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Suryadipta Roy, 2017. "Does time difference between countries reduce bilateral trade? An application of the correlated random effects method using panel data," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(10), pages 695-698, June.
    2. Silviano Esteve-Pérez & Salvador Gil-Pareja & Rafael Llorca-Vivero, 2020. "Does the GATT/WTO promote trade? After all, Rose was right," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 156(2), pages 377-405, May.
    3. Claire Brunel & Thomas Zylkin, 2022. "Do cross‐border patents promote trade?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(1), pages 379-418, February.
    4. Inmaculada Martínez-Zarzoso, 2019. "The Euro and the CFA Franc: Evidence of Sectoral Trade Effects," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 483-504, July.
    5. Thierry Mayer & Vincent Vicard & Soledad Zignago & Beata Javorcik, 2019. "The cost of non-Europe, revisited," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 34(98), pages 145-199.
    6. Adu, Raymond & Litsios, Ioannis & Baimbridge, Mark, 2022. "ECOWAS single currency: Prospective effects on trade," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    7. Duncan, Kevin Davey, 2020. "Three papers in regional dynamics and panel econometrics," ISU General Staff Papers 202001010800009129, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    8. Kenta Yamanouchi, 2019. "Heterogeneous Impacts of Free Trade Agreements: The Case of Japan," Asian Economic Papers, MIT Press, vol. 18(2), pages 1-20, Summer.
    9. Chen, Natalie & Novy, Dennis, 2017. "Currency unions, trade and heterogeneity," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 88487, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Jia Hou, 2020. "Revisiting the trade effects of the euro: data sources and various samples," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 59(6), pages 2731-2777, December.
    11. Koen Jochmans & Vincenzo Verardi, 2022. "Instrumental‐variable estimation of exponential‐regression models with two‐way fixed effects with an application to gravity equations," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(6), pages 1121-1137, September.
    12. Mario Larch & José-Antonio Monteiro & Roberta Piermartini & Yoto V. Yotov, 2019. "On the Effects of GATT/WTO Membership on Trade: They Are Positive and Large after All," CESifo Working Paper Series 7721, CESifo.
    13. Martin, Robert S., 2017. "Estimation of average marginal effects in multiplicative unobserved effects panel models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 16-19.
    14. Piermartini, Roberta & Yotov, Yoto, 2016. "Estimating Trade Policy Effects with Structural Gravity," School of Economics Working Paper Series 2016-10, LeBow College of Business, Drexel University.
    15. Sébastien Jean & Jean-Christophe Bureau, 2015. "Do Regional Trade Agreements Really Boost Trade? Estimates for Agricultural Products," Working Papers 2015-09, CEPII research center.
    16. Desbordes, Rodolphe & Wei, Shang-Jin, 2017. "The effects of financial development on foreign direct investment," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 153-168.
    17. Kunka Petkova & Andrzej Stasio & Martin Zagler, 2020. "On the relevance of double tax treaties," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 27(3), pages 575-605, June.
    18. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/6o8sdn6fuv9m1r3rt5verlv4b7 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Rangan Gupta & Giray Gozgor & Huseyin Kaya & Ender Demir, 2019. "Effects of geopolitical risks on trade flows: evidence from the gravity model," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 9(4), pages 515-530, December.
    20. Larch, Mario & Wanner, Joschka & Yotov, Yoto V., 2018. "Bi- and Unilateral trade effects of joining the Euro," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 230-234.
    21. Mika, Alina & Zymek, Robert, 2018. "Friends without benefits? New EMU members and the “Euro Effect” on trade," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 75-92.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Brexit; DSGE model; economic consequences; economic expertise; gravity model; HM Treasury; methodology;
    All these keywords.

    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:zbw:maxpod:213. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/maxpofr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.