IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/22989.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Standardization union effects: the case of EU enlargement

Author

Listed:
  • Hagemejer, Jan
  • Michalek, Jan

Abstract

The analysis of trade policy shows growing interest in various types of “standards”. While technical regulations and standards are introduced to protect the interest of consumers, they can also act as technical barriers to trade (TBT), as foreign suppliers complying with national regulations might be required to bear certain costs of adjustment to the new regime. Recent literature focused on the concept of standards and concluded that shared standards promote trade. We instead set our attention to technical regulations of the European Union and concentrate on their effects on trade costs. The analysis is inspired by Gandal and Shy’s (2001) cost reducing standardization union theory. This paper summarizes results of research undertaken within a larger product assessing importance of technical barriers to trade for new EU members. The recent empirical study by Hagemejer (2005), based on detailed trade data of the EU. He has shown that in sectors where the EU technical regulations are most complicated and require costly adaptation, the trade within EU is booming. He argues that the trade between EU members is more concentrated within the high-TBT products, while the imports from outside are focused on the low-TBT or no-TBT products. Thus, EU technical regulations might in fact be trade diverting if the difference in productivity between intra and extra-EU partners is large. In this context we analyze the pattern of new members’ exports to the “old” EU. We calculate the trade coverage of various standardisation approaches and analyze the comparative advantage structure of the new EU members. We demonstrate that the structure of TBT’s affecting exports from new EU members is slowly converging with the one that characterizes intra-EU trade. Therefore, we expect that CEEC’s countries will benefit from applying common technical regulations of the EU after accession. In the last section of our paper we report the results of questionnaire-based research made among Polish companies in December of 2004, i.e. after the Eastern enlargement. It seems that the adjustment costs were moderate and the adaptation process to new technical regulations is already completed. Therefore, one can expected welfare gains for new members of the EU. We perform a CGE simulation using a GTAP model to assess these gains.

Suggested Citation

  • Hagemejer, Jan & Michalek, Jan, 2006. "Standardization union effects: the case of EU enlargement," MPRA Paper 22989, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:22989
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/22989/1/MPRA_paper_22989.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gandal, Neil & Shy, Oz, 2001. "Standardization policy and international trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 363-383, April.
    2. Paul A. Brenton & Stefano Manzocchi (ed.), 2002. "Enlargement, Trade and Investment," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2747.
    3. Paul Brenton & John Sheehy & Marc Vancauteren, 2014. "Technical Barriers to Trade in the European Union: Importance for Accession Countries," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: INTERNATIONAL TRADE, DISTRIBUTION AND DEVELOPMENT Empirical Studies of Trade Policies, chapter 6, pages 105-124, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rau, Marie-Luise & van Tongeren, Frank W., 2006. "Modeling Differentiated Quality Standards in the Agri-Food Sector: The Case of Meat Trade in the EU," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25739, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Marie‐Luise Rau & Frank Van Tongeren, 2007. "Modeling differentiated quality standards in the agri‐food sector: the case of meat trade in the enlarged EU," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 37(2‐3), pages 305-315, September.
    3. Thomas Orliac, 2012. "The economics of trade facilitation [L'économie de la facilitation des échanges]," SciencePo Working papers Main tel-03681980, HAL.

    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. Clougherty, Joseph A. & Grajek, Michał, 2014. "International standards and international trade: Empirical evidence from ISO 9000 diffusion," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 70-82.
    2. Witold Czubala & Ben Shepherd & John S. Wilson, 2009. "Help or Hindrance? The Impact of Harmonised Standards on African Exports †," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies, vol. 18(5), pages 711-744, November.
    3. Toulemonde, Eric, 2013. "A welfare analysis of the principle of mutual recognition," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 1-16.
    4. Joseph A. Clougherty & Michal Grajek, 2009. "ISO 9000: New form of protectionism or common language in international trade?," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-09-006, ESMT European School of Management and Technology.
    5. Chen, Natalie & Novy, Dennis, 2012. "On the measurement of trade costs: direct vs. indirect approaches to quantifying standards and technical regulations," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(3), pages 401-414, July.
    6. MANTOVANI Andrea & VANCAUTEREN Mark, 2010. "The Harmonization of Technical Barriers to Trade, Innovation and Export Behavior: Theory with an Application to EU Environmental Regulations," EcoMod2003 330700094, EcoMod.
    7. Chevassus-Lozza, Emmanuelle & Majkovic, Darja & Persillet, Vanessa & Unguru, Manuela, 2005. "Technical Barriers to Trade in the European Union : Importance for the New EU Members. An Assessment for Agricultural and Food Products," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24621, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Egan Michelle & Guimarães Helena, 2013. "Compliance in the single market," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 14(4), pages 1-28, January.
    9. Kazumichi Iwasa & Toru Kikuchi, 2009. "Indirect network effects and the impact of trade liberalization: A note," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(4), pages 541-552.
    10. Kemppainen, Kari, 2008. "Integrating European retail payment systems : some economics of SEPA," Research Discussion Papers 22/2008, Bank of Finland.
    11. Mélise Jaud & Olivier Cadot & Akiko Suwa-Eisenmann, 2013. "Do food scares explain supplier concentration? An analysis of EU agri-food imports," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 40(5), pages 873-890, December.
    12. Vincent Vannetelbosch & Cecilia Vergari & Ana Mauleon, 2008. "Market integration in network industries," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 12(25), pages 1-7.
    13. Lu, Zheng, 2012. "EU-China Economic Relations: Interactions and Barriers," MPRA Paper 40646, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Barrett, Christopher B. & Yang, Yi-Nung, 2001. "Rational incompatibility with international product standards," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 171-191, June.
    15. Jensen, Hans G. & Frandsen, Søren E., 2003. "Implications of EU Accession of Ten New Members: The Copenhagen Agreement," Conference papers 331098, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    16. Khan, Imran Ullah & Kalirajan, Kaliappa, 2011. "The impact of trade costs on exports: An empirical modeling," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 1341-1347, May.
    17. Goyal, Ashima, 2005. "New technology and labour Markets: Entrants, outsourcing and matching," MPRA Paper 24620, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Vitor Trindade & Johannes Moenius, 2007. "Networks, Standards and Intellectual Property Rights," Working Papers 0705, Department of Economics, University of Missouri.
    19. Gene M. Grossman & Phillip McCalman & Robert W. Staiger, 2021. "The “New” Economics of Trade Agreements: From Trade Liberalization to Regulatory Convergence?," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(1), pages 215-249, January.
    20. Lee, Youngjae & Kennedy, Lynn, 2016. "Asymmetric Trade Flows and Their Implication for Competitiveness, Efficiency and Trade," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235427, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    EU enlargement; technical barriers to trade; international trade;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration
    • C68 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computable General Equilibrium Models
    • F10 - International Economics - - Trade - - - General

    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:pra:mprapa:22989. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.