Can trade agreements among small countries create trade?

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-216
Author(s):  
Marie Freckleton ◽  
Patrice Whitely
Keyword(s):  
Developing Economies ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Diversion ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Small Island ◽  
Trade Creation ◽  
Small Island Developing States ◽  
Regional Trade ◽  
Regional Trade Agreement ◽  
Content Type

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the effects of a regional trade agreement among a group of small island developing states on trade creation and trade diversion. Design/methodology/approach An augmented gravity model and panel data are used to estimate the trade creation and trade diversion effects. The generalized method of moments technique is used to account for possible endogeneity. Country pair and time fixed effects are also included. Findings The regional trade agreement had a positive effect on intra-regional trade creation, but there was no significant diversion of imports from extra-regional trade partners. Practical implications Small developing economies can benefit from regional trade agreements (RTAs) among themselves. The trade diversion effects of such agreements are likely to be limited. Originality/value To the best of authors’ knowledge, this is the only paper which investigates the impact of RTAs among small island developing states.

scholarly journals TRADE CREATION DAN TRADE DIVERSION ANTARA INDONESIA DAN NEGARA-NEGARA ASEAN-KOREA

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-81
Author(s):  
Tresna Ritaningsih ◽  
Dedi Budiman Hakim ◽  
Sahara Sahara
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade ◽  
Regional Integration ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Diversion ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Creation ◽  
Implementation Phase ◽  
Trading Partners ◽  
The Impact

Indonesia has several free trade agreements with trading partners that aimed to eliminate tariff and non tariff trade barriers. One of the free trade agreements is ASEAN-Korea FTA. Trade agreement in goods in ASEAN-Korea FTA was agreed since 2007 and now it is entering the implementation phase. The objective of this research is to determine whether the ASEAN-Korea FTA would increase the trade flows between Indonesia and ASEAN-Korea’ countries by analyzing the impact of regional integration on trade creation and trade diversion. This research is utilized balance panel data including 13 countries from 1998-2012. The empirical result shows that all Indonesia's trading sectors experienced decline because of trade diversion and trade creation does not occur. Indonesia's import trading with the non-member countries of ASEAN-Korea is 68% lower than the existing trading. Key word: trade creation, trade diversion, free trade agreement, trade in goods

scholarly journals TRADE CREATION DAN TRADE DIVERSION ANTARA INDONESIA DAN NEGARA-NEGARA ASEAN-KOREA

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-81
Author(s):  
Tresna Ritaningsih ◽  
Dedi Budiman Hakim ◽  
Sahara Sahara
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade ◽  
Regional Integration ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Diversion ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Creation ◽  
Implementation Phase ◽  
Trading Partners ◽  
The Impact

Indonesia has several free trade agreements with trading partners that aimed to eliminate tariff and non tariff trade barriers. One of the free trade agreements is ASEAN-Korea FTA. Trade agreement in goods in ASEAN-Korea FTA was agreed since 2007 and now it is entering the implementation phase. The objective of this research is to determine whether the ASEAN-Korea FTA would increase the trade flows between Indonesia and ASEAN-Korea’ countries by analyzing the impact of regional integration on trade creation and trade diversion. This research is utilized balance panel data including 13 countries from 1998-2012. The empirical result shows that all Indonesia's trading sectors experienced decline because of trade diversion and trade creation does not occur. Indonesia's import trading with the non-member countries of ASEAN-Korea is 68% lower than the existing trading. Key word: trade creation, trade diversion, free trade agreement, trade in goods

scholarly journals Trade creation and trade diversion effects from Croatia’s CEFTA and EU membership

2021 ◽  
Vol 72 (4) ◽  
pp. 489-521
Author(s):  
Hrvoje Jošić ◽  
Maja Bašić
Keyword(s):  
Random Effects ◽  
Trade Diversion ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Flows ◽  
Regional Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Creation ◽  
Total Trade ◽  
Regional Trade ◽  
Eu Membership ◽  
The Eu

This paper provides a detailed empirical study of trade creation and trade diversion effects arising from Croatia's two regional trade agreements, the Central European Free Trade Agreement (CEFTA) and the European Union (the EU). It offers a foundation for discussion about future trade policies in terms of benefits and drawbacks from those regional trade agreements. Croatia’s imports, exports and total trade flows with 180 trading partner countries were examined for the period of 2000 – 2016. Cross-country panel regression using gravity model of international trade assessed pooled OLS, fixed and random effects, as well as more robust Tobit and PPML estimator models. The random effects model found positive effects of Croatia-CEFTA integration evident in trade creation in imports, exports and total trade flows. Croatia-EU integration exhibits no significant effect of trade creation in neither imports, exports nor total trade flows. Nonetheless, there is a trade diversion effect in cases of imports and total trade flows. In the Tobit model CEFTA created trade in imports, exports and total trade flows, while the EU diverted trade in imports and total trade flows. Finally, the robust PPML estimator found that: (1) CEFTA membership created trade in imports, exports and total trade flows, and (2) the EU membership diverted trade in imports and exports, and created trade in total trade flows.

Was India Right in Not Joining RCEP? A Cost–Benefit Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 097492842110477
Author(s):  
Monika Jain
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
South Korea ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Trade Diversion ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Trade Creation ◽  
Asean Countries ◽  
The Cost ◽  
The Impact

India dropped out of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), which included the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries, China, South Korea, New Zealand, Japan and Australia, after negotiating for almost seven years in November 2018 on the grounds of national interest and also that free trade agreements (FTAs) did not amount to free trade and led to more trade diversion than trade creation. The cost and benefit of a regional agreement depend on the amount of trade creation with respect to trade diversion (Panagriya, 2000). This study tries to examine India’s concerns and at the same time, highlights the cost of not joining RCEP. India’s trade deficit with 11 out of the 15 RCEP nations has been a major cause of concern. Unfavourable trade balance, concerns about the impact on dairy sector, economic slowdown, past experience with FTA’s, China factor, data localisation, rules of origin, the experience of ASEAN countries with Sino-FTA have been some of the reasons behind India’s decision to opt-out of this mega multilateral agreement. Also, bilateral trade agreements with some RCEP countries such as Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and South Korea were operational. A multilateral trade agreement with ASEAN countries was very much in place. So, trade between India and 12 of the RCEP member countries would not have changed much after India’s inclusion in RCEP. The impact of lower tariffs would have been evident for the remaining three countries: China, Australia and New Zealand. Furthermore, there was fear of a massive surge in imports of manufactures from China, dairy imports from Australia and New Zealand. This study also examines the long term impact of this decision and if India has missed out on becoming a part of the global value chain and gaining greater market access in the Asia Pacific region. India’s policy of import substitution and protectionism did not capitulate desired results in the past. Hence, a critical evaluation of India’s decision and some validation on her concerns and fears have been done.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document