中美农产品贸易收益核算及贸易摩擦的影响分析

在全球生产分割的背景下,海关统计数据由于包含大量重复计算的成分,并不能真实反映一国某部门的贸易收益情况。文章通过构建跨国投入产出模型,定义增加值出口为衡量双边贸易收益的指标,从增加值出口变化趋势、行业分布情况及贸易收益的实现方式,分别剖析2000~2014年中美两国农产品各部门的增加值出口情况。发现中美农产品双边贸易的盈余方实为中国,农产品行业的大量增加值隐藏在本国的其他部门中出口。中国市场对美国农业经济的拉动作用在提升,两国农产品行业实现收益的方式不同,中国越来越趋向于附加值含量低的粗加工中间品出口。两国农产品贸易关系紧密,对第三国市场的依赖不断下降,中美贸易摩擦对两国农产品行业的收益都将造成较大的冲击。     

Firms’ export decisions—fixed trade costs and the size of the export market

This article presents a model of international trade under monopolistic competition. In the increasing returns sector firms face fixed, in addition to variable, trade costs, and both exporters and non-exporters may coexist. Exporters benefit from access to large foreign markets, thus a small country has a higher share of exporting firms than a large one. In contrast to standard models, the increasing returns sector will be more open in a small country than in a large one, and a small country may be a net exporter of such commodities, despite the disadvantage of a smaller home market.     

Assessing the Benefits to Developing Countries of Liberalisation in Services Trade

This paper discusses the potential impacts of services trade liberalisation on developing countries and reviews existing quantitative studies. Its purpose is to distill themes from current literature rather than to advocate specific policy changes. The picture emerging is one of valiant attempts to quantify in the presence of formidable analytical and data problems yielding only a clouded image of likely impacts on trade, consumption, production and welfare emerging to the point that the policy implications of results are not always clear. A central intuition would seem to be that with genuine two‐sided (OECD/non‐OECD) liberalisation in services that are seemingly considerably labour‐intensive in delivery, the potential should be there for significant developing country gains from global liberalisation allowing full cross‐border delivery. However, this picture is neither fully endorsed by available studies, neither is it explicitly contradicted. This seems to be the case for a number of reasons. One difficulty with the studies is that the conceptual underpinnings of what determines trade in services and how this trade differs analytically from that of trade in goods (if at all) is an issue prior to assessments of impacts of liberalisation of trade in services on developing countries being discussed. Key issues here are the treatment of mobility for service providers (both firms and workers), and the differing analytical structures needed to analyse individual service items (banking, insurance, telecoms, etc.). Some recent analytical work suggests that liber‐alisation in some service items, such as banking, need not always yield gains, and this contrasts with quantitative studies where analytical structures mirror conventional trade in goods treatments. The discussion and measurement of barriers to service trade in both developed and developing countries is also problematic. One is talking of domestic regulation, entry barriers, portability of providers, competition policy regimes more so than only barriers at national borders, as with tariffs. Both representing and quantifying such barriers raise major difficulties, and these are also spelled out in the paper. Which barriers actually restrict trade, and which do not because they are redundant is one issue, for instance. It is also often misleading to represent barriers in simple ad valorem equivalent form. As a result, numerical modelling work on the effects of service trade barriers which is based on ad valorem equivalent modelling is often not fully convincing. In addition, individual country results vary considerably across studies in ways that it is frequently hard for outsiders to understand. Studies do, however, point towards a tentative conclusion that effects are small and positive for developed and most developing countries if FDI flow changes accompanying service trade liberalisation are excluded from the analysis, but much larger and more variable across countries if they are present. This could be taken to suggest that mode 3 GATS liberalisation (roughly captured in some studies) might be important for developing countries; but mode 4 GATS liberalisation could be even more important given large barriers to labour flows across countries. Thus, if service trade liberalisation is thought of primarily as a surrogate for improved functioning of global factor markets in which more capital flows to developing countries and more labour flows from them to developed countries, then developing countries could benefit in a major way from genuine two‐sided (OECD/non‐OECD) liberalisation. Developing countries fear, however, that in global negotiations on services liberalisation where there is an asymmetry of power that largely one‐sided liberalisation may be the outcome, and their gains will be correspondingly limited. The paper concludes by evaluating econometric studies on linkage between services liberalisation and country growth rules, and briefly discusses some key sectoral issues in health services and transportation.     

The distribution of gains from bilateral tariff reductions

A two-good, two-country model is used to analyse the distribution of gains from proportionate, bilateral tariff reductions It is shown that the distribution of gains is given by the solution to a rather complicated quadratic equation which exhibits multiple real roots. The country with the more elastic offer surface will be the relative gainer, for example, if it has either a very large or a very small tariff relative to the other country's tariff and relative to its own ‘optimal’ (Nash-equilibrium) tariff.     

Who in Brazil Will Gain from Global Trade Reforms?

The potential impacts of multilateral trade liberalisation on developing countries are the subject of numerous controversies. One particular concern is that Brazil, a major agricultural exporter and a country with one of the world's most unequal income distributions, will reap a substantial share of the potential benefits to developing countries from agricultural trade reform, and that most of those benefits will go to large‐scale commercial farmers rather than to the country's smallholders. This claim is explored via a global general equilibrium model and a national model of Brazil containing multiple agricultural and non‐agricultural households. Brazil is found to account for nearly one‐half of all the benefits to developing countries deriving from global agricultural trade reform. These gains are associated with improvements in the welfare of each group and a lower incidence of poverty. Large‐scale producers gain more than smallholders as they tend to be relatively specialised in export products, but there are important gains to agricultural employees, who are relatively poor, and to urban households, who benefit from the expansion of the agro‐food sector. Overall, there is no discernible impact on income inequality, and no evidence that the gains to commercial farmers occur at the expense of poorer households.     

Allocative efficiency,mark-ups,and the welfare gains from trade

This paper develops an index of allocative efficiency that depends upon the distribution of mark-ups across goods and is separable from an index of standard Ricardian gains from trade. It determines how changes in trade frictions affect allocative efficiency in an oligopoly model of international trade, decomposing the effect into the cost-change channel and the price-change channel. Formulas are derived shedding light on the signs and magnitudes of the two channels. In symmetric country models, trade tends to increase allocative efficiency through the cost-change channel, yielding a welfare benefit beyond productive efficiency gains. In contrast, the price-change channel has ambiguous effects on allocative efficiency.     

Allocative efficiency,mark-ups,and the welfare gains from trade

This paper develops an index of allocative efficiency that depends upon the distribution of mark-ups across goods and is separable from an index of standard Ricardian gains from trade. It determines how changes in trade frictions affect allocative efficiency in an oligopoly model of international trade, decomposing the effect into the cost-change channel and the price-change channel. Formulas are derived shedding light on the signs and magnitudes of the two channels. In symmetric country models, trade tends to increase allocative efficiency through the cost-change channel, yielding a welfare benefit beyond productive efficiency gains. In contrast, the price-change channel has ambiguous effects on allocative efficiency.     

REDISTRIBUTION AND FREE TRADE IN AGRICULTURE: ARE THEY COMPLEMENTARY?

The purpose of the paper is to look at the welfare effects of trade in agricultural goods in a less developed country where the agricultural market is controlled by a handful of large farmers. It is shown that the success of trade reform depends on the distribution of output between large and small farmers and the success of land reform leading to redistribution from the large to the small farmers depends on trade reform. In other words, if undertaken in isolation, each reform might lead to a fall in welfare, but if jointly undertaken, they will lead to an increase in welfare. Thus the two reforms are complementary.     

On the origins of comparative advantage

This paper proposes a simple theory of international trade with endogenous productivity differences across countries. The core of our analysis lies in the determinants of the division of labor. We consider a world economy comprising two large countries, with a continuum of goods and one factor of production, labor. Each good is characterized by its complexity, defined as the number of tasks that must be performed to produce one unit. There are increasing returns to scale in the performance of each task, which creates gains from specialization, and uncertainty in the enforcement of each contract, which create transaction costs. The trade-off between these two forces pins down the size of productive teams across sectors in each country. Under free trade, the country where teams are larger specializes in the more complex goods. In our model, it is the country where the product of institutional quality and human per worker capital is larger. Hence, better institutions and more educated workers are complementary sources of comparative advantage in the more complex industries.     

Multilateral,Regional and Bilateral Trade‐Policy Options for the United States and Japan

We have used the Michigan Model of World Production and Trade to simulate the economic effects on the United States, Japan, and other major trading countries/regions of the Doha Round of WTO multilateral trade negotiations and a variety of regional/bilateral free trade agreements (FTAs) involving the United States and Japan. We estimate that an assumed reduction of post‐Uruguay Round tariffs and other barriers on agricultural and industrial products and services by 33 per cent in the Doha Round would increase world welfare by $686.4 billion, with gains of $164.0 billion for the United States, $132.6 billion for Japan, and significant gains for all other industrialised and developing countries/regions. If there were global free trade with all post‐Uruguay Round trade barriers completely removed, world welfare would increase by $2.1 trillion, with gains of $497.0 billion (5.5 per cent of GNP) for the United States and $401.9 billion (6.2 per cent of GNP) for Japan. Regional agreements such as an APEC FTA, an ASEAN Plus 3 FTA, and a Western Hemisphere FTA would increase global and member country welfare but much less so than the Doha multilateral trade round would. Separate bilateral FTAs involving Japan with Singapore, Mexico, Chile and Korea, and the United States with Chile, Singapore and Korea would have positive, though generally small, welfare effects on the partner countries, but potentially disruptive sectoral employment shifts in some countries. There would be trade diversion and detrimental welfare effects on some non‐member countries for both the regional and bilateral FTAs analysed. The welfare gains from multilateral trade liberalisation are therefore considerably greater than the gains from preferential trading arrangements and more uniformly positive for all countries.     

Free trade and the environment

In this essay I examine the impact of ‘free’ international commodity markets and ‘free’ national factor markets on environmental quality in the context of a ‘small’ country committed to Lindahl taxation of environmental degradation. The ‘gains from trade’ proposition, as well as GATT Article XX, serve as the backdrop for my analysis.     

DOES INTERNATIONAL TRADE HURT THE ENVIRONMENT? OLD THEORY,NEW DEVELOPMENTS

In this article, it is shown that if a country specializes in the production of dirty goods it does not necessarily become dirtier as the pollution haven hypothesis predicts. A trade equilibrium is constructed where a rich country specializes in the production of the clean good and a poor country specializes in the production of the dirty good and both countries become cleaner after the gains from trade are internalized. The result casts serious doubts about the effectiveness of using trade restrictions to improve the environmental conditions of developing countries as some environmental groups have proposed. In this particular case, the use of restrictions is counterproductive not only for the poor country but also for the rich country.     

General equilibrium trade modelling with Canada–US transportation costs

Transportation costs are an important topic in international trade, but seldom have researchers paid attention to general equilibrium trade modelling with transportation costs and explored their relevant effects. This paper uses numerical general equilibrium trade model structures to simulate the impacts of transportation costs on welfare and trade for a Canada–US country pair case. We compare two groups of model structures: Armington assumption models and homogeneous goods models. Within these two groups of models, we also compare balanced trade structures to trade imbalance structures and production function transportation costs to iceberg transportation costs. Armington goods models generate more absolute welfare gains from transportation cost elimination than homogeneous goods models. Welfare gains under balanced trade structures are larger in production function transportation cost scenarios than in iceberg transportation cost scenarios, but under trade imbalance structures, welfare gains are greater under iceberg transportation cost scenarios. Canada's welfare gains in the iceberg transportation cost scenario are significantly larger than gains in the production function transportation cost scenario. On trade effects, homogeneous goods models generate more export and import gains, balanced trade structures have more trade variations, and iceberg transportation costs generate more trade effects.     

Wie teuer wäre ein Handelskrieg?

Motivated by current events, this article provides a brief overview of recent attempts to quantify the gains from trade and the costs of trade wars. The simple message is that trade generates large gains and trade wars entail large costs. Recent estimates suggest that the worldwide gains from trade amount to around a quarter of global real income and that a global trade war would destroy almost a quarter of these gains.     

开放条件下贸易利益内涵的界定及其相关理论评述

长期以来,参与国际分工与贸易的各国是否能从国际贸易中获得利益这一问题,一直是理论界争论的焦点,因此,本文从狭义的贸易利益与广义的贸易利益,真实的贸易利益与潜在的贸易利益,贸易利益与地区经济一体化,贸易利益与不完全竞争、规模报酬递增四个角度作了一些评述。本文认为,只有在一定的条件之下,一国才可以从开放的国际贸易中获得贸易利益,最终实现一国经济持续增长的目标,如政府在开放经济条件下采取适当的贸易政策、在开放贸易情况下补偿受损人群的利益、参与区域经济一体化等。     

自由贸易及跨界污染背景下的国际环境政策协调

文章构建了一个考虑跨界污染损害的福利函数,推导出自由贸易背景下某国的最优污染税,并与世界福利最大化时的最优污染税进行比较,以说明国家间环境政策协调的必要性。文章考虑了四种情况,分析结果表明,只有在该国为小国且污染不跨界时不需要国际协调;当该国为大国或者污染跨界时,单个国家的独立行为通常不会产生合意的世界福利水平,此时需要国际协调以实现世界福利最大化。大国的污染政策具有贸易条件效应,因而出口国有设定过高污染税的激励,而进口国则会设定过低的污染税,双方都寻求转变贸易条件以有利于本方。而污染跨界时单个国家通常会有"搭便车"的激励,此时会实施较为宽松的环境政策。     

新贸易保护主义的新发展与中国的战略性贸易政策选择——基于弱势产业与贸易保护有效性的分析

本文在弱势产业划分与贸易保护有效性分析的基础上,探讨新贸易保护主义的新发展及其对中国进出口贸易的影响,分析我国的战略性贸易政策选择。本文认为:是否值得与能否对弱势产业进行贸易保护,在大国与小国的答案并不完全相同,可以利用大国规模经济效应提升弱势产业的比较竞争优势;对优势产业与“夕阳产业”同时进行保护、贸易保护的意识形态工具创新是新贸易保护主义新发展的主要特点;为了应对新贸易保护主义新发展对我国进出口贸易的冲击,必须制定符合我国国情的战略性贸易政策。     

The gains from international trade in the context of a growing economy

This paper discusses the effects of trade on long-run equilibrium values of some important economic variables of a small growing economy under alternative assumptions about the saving behavior. Using a two-commodity and two-factor model it is shown that long-run gains from trade depend not only on the saving behavior but also on the comparative advantage of the country at its autarkic steady state.     

Fixed exchange rates and trade

A classic argument for a fixed exchange rate is its promotion of trade. Empirical support for this, however, is mixed. While one branch of research consistently shows a small negative effect of exchange rate volatility on trade, another, more recent, branch presents evidence of a large positive impact of currency unions on trade. This paper helps resolve this disconnect. Our results, which use a new data-based classification of fixed exchange rate regimes, show a large, significant effect of a fixed exchange rate on bilateral trade between a base country and a country that pegs to it. These results suggest an economically relevant role for exchange rate regimes in trade determination since a significant amount of world trade is conducted between countries with fixed exchange rates.     

A South–South Survival Strategy: The Potential for Trade among Developing Countries

Trade between developing countries, or South–South trade, has been growing rapidly in recent years following reductions in tariff barriers. However, significant barriers remain, and there is currently reluctance in many developing countries to undertake further reductions, with a preference instead for focusing on opening up access to developed country markets, or maintaining the status quo given that multilateral liberalisation may result in the erosion of preferential access enjoyed by some developing countries. This emphasis on Northern markets represents a missed opportunity for developing countries. To assess this we compare the potential effects of the removal of barriers on South–South trade with the gains from developed country liberalisation and from regional free trade areas within Africa, Asia and Latin America. A general equilibrium model, the Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) model, containing information on preferential bilateral tariffs, is used to estimate the impacts. The results indicate that the opening up of Northern markets would provide annual welfare gains to developing countries of $22 billion. However, the removal of South–South barriers has the potential to generate gains 40 per cent larger. The results imply that giving greater emphasis to removing barriers between as well as within continents could prove a successful Southern survival strategy.