The Growth of Bilateralism

One of the most notable international economic events over the past 20 years has been the proliferation of bilateral free trade agreements (FTAs). Bilateral agreements account for 80 percent of all agreements notified to the WTO, 94 percent of those signed or under negotiation, and currently 100 percent of those at the proposal stage. Some have argued that the growth of bilateralism is attributable to governments having pursued a policy of "competitive liberalization" - implementing bilateral FTAs to offset potential trade diversion caused by FTAs of "third-country-pairs" - but the growth of bilateralism can also be attributed potentially to "tariff complementarity" - the incentive for FTA members to reduce their external tariffs on nonmembers. Guided by new comparative statics from the numerical general equilibrium monopolistic competition model of FTA economic determinants in Baier and Bergstrand (2004), we augment their parsimonious logit (and probit) model of the economic determinants of bilateral FTAs to incorporate theory-motivated indexes to examine the in°uence of existing memberships on subsequent FTA formations. The model can predict correctly 90 percent of the bilateral FTAs within five years of their formation, while still predicting "No-FTA" correctly in 90 percent of the observations when no FTA exists, using a sample of over 350,000 observations for pairings of 146 countries from 1960-2005. Even imposing the higher correct prediction rate of "No-FTA" of 97 percent in Baier and Bergstrand (2004), the parsimonious model still predicts correctly 75 percent of these rare FTA events; only 3 percent of the observations reflect a country-pair having an FTA in any year. The results suggest that while evidence supports that "competitive liberalization" is a force for bilateralism the efect on the likelihood a pair of countries forming an FTA of the pair's own FTAs with other countries (i.e., tariff complementarity) is likely just as important as the effect of third-country-pairs' FTAs (i.e. competitive liberalization) for the growth of bilateralism.Free Trade Agreements; International Trade; Endogenous Tariffs

Do free trade agreements actually increase members’ international trade?

For more than forty years, the gravity equation has been a workhorse for cross-country empirical analyses of international trade flows and, in particular, the effects of free trade agreements (FTAs) on trade flows. However, the gravity equation is subject to the same econometric critique as earlier cross-industry studies of U.S. tariff and nontariff barriers and U.S. multilateral imports: Trade policy is not an exogenous variable. The authors address econometrically the endogeneity of FTAs using instrumental-variable (IV) techniques, control-function (CF) techniques, and panel-data techniques; IV and CF approaches do not adjust for endogeneity well, but a panel-data approach does. Accounting econometrically for the FTA variable’s endogeneity yields striking empirical results: The effect of FTAs on trade flows is quintupled.

The growth of bilateralism

One of the most notable international economic events over the past 20 years has been the proliferation of bilateral free trade agreements (FTAs). Bilateral agreements account for 80 percent of all agreements notified to the WTO, 94 percent of those signed or under negotiation, and currently 100 percent of those at the proposal stage. Some have argued that the growth of bilateralism is attributable to governments having pursued a policy of “competitive liberalization" - implementing bilateral FTAs to offset potential trade diversion caused by FTAs of “third-country-pairs" - but the growth of bilateralism can also be attributed potentially to “tariff complementarity" - the incentive for FTA members to reduce their external tariffs on nonmembers. Guided by new comparative statics from the numerical general equilibrium monopolistic competition model of FTA economic determinants in Baier and Bergstrand (2004), we augment their parsimonious logit (and probit) model of the economic determinants of bilateral FTAs to incorporate theory-motivated indexes to examine the influence of existing memberships on subsequent FTA formations. The model can predict correctly 90 percent of the bilateral FTAs within five years of their formation, while still predicting “No-FTA" correctly in 90 percent of the observations when no FTA exists, using a sample of over 350,000 observations for pairings of 146 countries from 1960-2005. Even imposing the higher correct prediction rate of “No-FTA" of 97 percent in Baier and Bergstrand (2004), the parsimonious model still predicts correctly 75 percent of these rare FTA events; only 3 percent of the observations reflect a country-pair having an FTA in any year. The results suggest that - while evidence supports that “competitive liberalization" is a force for bilateralism - the effect on the likelihood a pair of countries forming an FTA of the pair's own FTAs with other countries (i.e., tariff complementarity) is likely just as important as the effect of third-country-pairs' FTAs (i.e., competitive liberalization) for the growth of bilateralism

Factor Returns, Institutions, and Geography: A View From Trade

We examine the importance of institutions and geography for determining workers' wages and the return to capital. These returns to labor and capital are examined through the lens of labor and capital's productivities, which are directly related to the factors' returns. We estimate productivities of labor and capital based on trade flows across countries and present statistical evidence that these productivities are related to total factor productivities which rationalize output differences across countries. We examine whether these labor and capital productivities are related to countries' political institutions and geography. Protection of property rights is the dominant influence on both labor and capital productivity. There is some evidence that a democratic government affects productivity, but once property rights are included in the analysis, the overall democracy index has little influence on factor productivity.. Geography is only important in terms of distance to a large market. Factors such as the incidence of malaria are relatively unimportant. The unimportance of geography is not only statistical. For example, if the Philippines kept its geography but had the United Kingdom 's institutions, the Philippines ' labor productivity would increase from seven percent to 75 percent of the U.S. 's and capital productivity would increase from 25 percent to 58 percent of the U.S. 's. On the other hand, if the Philippines were to keep its institutions and were magically more to the United Kingdom 's geographic location, labor productivity would increase only from seven percent to 28 percent and capital productivity would increase from 25 percent to 26 percent.

How important are capital and total factor productivity for economic growth?

The authors examine the relative importance of the growth of physical and human capital and the growth of total factor productivity (TFP) using newly organized data on 145 countries that span more than one hundred years for twenty-four of these countries. For all countries, only 3 percent of average output growth per worker is associated with TFP growth. This world average masks interesting variations across countries and regions. Of the nine regions, TFP growth accounts for about twenty percent of average output growth in three regions and between ten and zero percent in the other three regions. In three regions, TFP growth is negative on average. The authors use priors from theories to construct estimates of the relative importance of the variances of aggregate input growth and TFP growth for the variance of output growth across countries. Across all countries, variation in aggregate input growth per worker could account for as much as 35 percent of the variance of the growth of output per worker across countries, and variation in TFP growth could account for as much as 87 percent of that variance. Much of the importance of the variance of TFP growth appears to be associated with negative TFP growth.Productivity ; Economic development ; Capital ; Industrial productivity

Modern economic growth and recent stagnation

During the past 200 years, most countries have entered a period of modern economic growth-consistent increases in output, input, and productivity per worker that were rare in previous centuries. Even so, a few regions of the world have experienced stagnant or falling living standards in recent years, which some have interpreted as typical of modern economic growth in the last two centuries. ; Using data for most countries in the world since the 1800s and early 1900s, the authors find that (1) economic growth has improved the lives of people all around the world compared to those of their ancestors and (2) the economic stagnation or decline in some parts of the world in recent decades is unusual in the broader context of the history of the world since 1800. ; The authors find that economic growth had become nearly global by the 1950s, and the recent economic declines in four regions in recent decades are atypical. Decreases in income and productivity are likely to be transitory in Central and Eastern Europe but may be longer lasting in the Middle East and Latin America. While modern economic growth may never have begun in Sub-Saharan Africa, government policies in that region have done more to throttle economic growth than to encourage it.Economic history ; Economic development

On the Widely Differing Effects of Free Trade Agreements: Lessons from Twenty Years of Trade Integration

We develop a novel two stage methodology that allows us to study the empirical determinants of the ex post effects of past free trade agreements (FTAs) as well as obtain ex ante predictions for the effects of future FTAs. We first identify 908 unique estimates of the effects of FTAs on different trading pairs for the years 1986-2006. We then employ these estimates as our dependent variable in a “second stage” analysis characterizing the heterogeneity in these effects. Interestingly, most of this heterogeneity (∼ 2/3) occurs within FTAs (rather than across different FTAs), with asymmetric effects within pairs (on exports vs. imports) also playing an important role. Our second stage analysis provides several intuitive explanations behind these variations. Even within the same agreement, FTA effects are weaker for more distant pairs and for pairs with otherwise high levels of ex ante trade frictions. The effects of new FTAs are similarly weaker for pairs with existing agreements already in place. In addition, we are able to relate asymmetries in FTA effects to each country’s ability to influence the other’s terms of trade. Out-of-sample predictions incorporating these insights enable us to predict direction-specific effects of future FTAs between any pair of countries. A simulation of the general equilibrium effects of TTIP demonstrates the significance of our methods

Capital trading, stock trading, and the inflation tax on equity: a note

The authors show that there is more responsiveness of consumption and output to changes in the money supply than exists in the standard neoclassical growth models.Capital investments

Trade agreements and trade flows: Estimating the effect of free trade agreements on trade flows with an application to the European Union

This paper examines the proposed EU-GCC FTA, a free trade agreement (FTA) between the EU and the Gulf Cooperation Counil (GCC), which includes Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. The paper first takes a fresh look at the methodology generally applied to analysis of potential FTAs, and then uses its own enhanced methodology to analyse the proposed EU-GCC FTA.trade flows,free trade agreement,FTA,gulf cooperation council,GCC,Baier,Bergstrand,European Economy. Economic Papers