MERCOSUR in gravity: an accounting approach to analyzing its trade effects

This paper aims at unveiling the roots of integration-induced trade effects for MERCOSUR. For this purpose, its methodology combines previous dummy-variables- and continuous variable approaches to identifying trade creation and trade diversion effects in a gravity model framework. Applying a straightforward accounting exercise to the integration-induced trade effects which are found for MERCOSUR en bloc, two results are central: Firstly, with sectoral exceptions, I generally identify pure trade creating effects on the import side but also find trade diversion with associate countries when refining extra-bloc country status. Secondly, while extra-bloc import growth seems to be driven predominantly by non-tariff determinants, trade creation in pooled commodity imports for the largest fraction stems from differences in the tariff treatment between trading partners.     

Sign here,please! On developing countries’ market access conditions in regional trade agreements

Have regional trade agreements (RTAs) improved market access conditions for developing countries? Employing a measure expressing effective tariff margins and using disaggregated panel data for a sample of 45 developing country exporters, 60 export destinations, and the period between 1991 and 2015, it is shown that this question can generally be answered in the affirmative. Although the effect is estimated to be moderate, RTAs might thus be an important long‐run building block in the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in order to increase developing countries’ participation in world trade. On closer inspection, however, for the countries included in the sample, there is considerable variation depending on the choice of integration partners and economic sectors. More specifically, market access improvements cannot be found for African economies in South–South agreements and developing countries engaging formally with the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) or the Republic of Korea, while leading industrialized nations are reluctant to grant improved market access to developing countries in RTAs especially in capital‐intensive (high‐productivity) manufacturing sectors.     

The Aftermath of Anti-Dumping: Are Temporary Trade Barriers Really Temporary?

A consistent finding in the literature is that anti-dumping (AD) acts as a significant barrier to bilateral trade, in particular, during the time such measures are in force. Adding to a relatively scarce empirical literature, however, we identify adverse impacts of AD which survive well beyond its revocation. More specifically, while we cannot rule out a slight post-revocation recovery, we find empirical evidence that once affected bilateral trade does not fully recover on average following revocation. We use panel data at the Harmonized System four-digit (HS4) level of aggregation to produce these results and show that they are robust to the duration of AD cases, the time of their imposition and revocation, differentiation by economic sector and the nature of imposing countries. Several explanations for our observed empirical results seem plausible, and we provide a theoretical framework which suggests our results could be driven by market exit or underinvestment of targeted firms.