IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cje/issued/v37y2004i1p199-218.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Alternative hypotheses and the volume of trade: the gravity equation and the extent of specialization

Author

Listed:
  • Jon Haveman
  • David Hummels

Abstract

We examine why the gravity equation works and the implications for its use. First, we demonstrate that the gravity equation as a statistical relationship can be generated from a model with incomplete specialization and trade costs. Second, we analyse the predominance of zero bilateral trade values as a `puzzle' broadly inconsistent with the complete specialization models typically used to derive the gravity equation, but consistent with the alternative hypothesis of incomplete specialization. Third, we demonstrate that the explanation for why the gravity equation works has considerable relevance for how the gravity equation is interpreted and used and how we view bilateral trade.

Suggested Citation

  • Jon Haveman & David Hummels, 2004. "Alternative hypotheses and the volume of trade: the gravity equation and the extent of specialization," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 37(1), pages 199-218, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:cje:issued:v:37:y:2004:i:1:p:199-218
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3696106
    Download Restriction: only available to JSTOR subscribers
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bergstrand, Jeffrey H, 1985. "The Gravity Equation in International Trade: Some Microeconomic Foundations and Empirical Evidence," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 67(3), pages 474-481, August.
    2. Romer, Paul, 1994. "New goods, old theory, and the welfare costs of trade restrictions," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 5-38, February.
    3. Gianmarco Ottaviano & Takatoshi Tabuchi & Jacques-François Thisse, 2021. "Agglomeration And Trade Revisited," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Firms and Workers in a Globalized World Larger Markets, Tougher Competition, chapter 3, pages 59-85, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Alan V. Deardorff, 2011. "Determinants of Bilateral Trade: Does Gravity Work in a Neoclassical World?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Robert M Stern (ed.), Comparative Advantage, Growth, And The Gains From Trade And Globalization A Festschrift in Honor of Alan V Deardorff, chapter 24, pages 267-293, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. Helpman, Elhanan, 1987. "Imperfect competition and international trade: Evidence from fourteen industrial countries," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 62-81, March.
    6. Robert C. Feenstra & James R. Markusen & Andrew K. Rose, 2001. "Using the gravity equation to differentiate among alternative theories of trade," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(2), pages 430-447, May.
    7. David Hummels & James Levinsohn, 1995. "Monopolistic Competition and International Trade: Reconsidering the Evidence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(3), pages 799-836.
    8. Simon J. Evenett & Wolfgang Keller, 2002. "On Theories Explaining the Success of the Gravity Equation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(2), pages 281-316, April.
    9. McCallum, John, 1995. "National Borders Matter: Canada-U.S. Regional Trade Patterns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(3), pages 615-623, June.
    10. Davis, Donald R, 1997. "Critical Evidence on Comparative Advantage? North-North Trade in a Multilateral World," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(5), pages 1051-1060, October.
    11. Anderson, James E, 1979. "A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 106-116, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Simone Juhasz Silva & Douglas Nelson, 2012. "Does Aid Cause Trade? Evidence from an Asymmetric Gravity Model," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(5), pages 545-577, May.
    2. Michele Fratianni, 2007. "The Gravity Equation in International Trade," Working Papers 2007-17, Indiana University, Kelley School of Business, Department of Business Economics and Public Policy.
    3. Juliette Milgram, 2003. "Quantitative Restrictions on Clothing Imports: Impact and Determinants of the Common Trade Policy Towards Developing Countries," Economic Working Papers at Centro de Estudios Andaluces E2003/04, Centro de Estudios Andaluces.
    4. James Harrigan, 2001. "Specialization and the Volume of Trade: Do the Data Obey the Laws?," NBER Working Papers 8675, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Dennis Novy, 2013. "Gravity Redux: Measuring International Trade Costs With Panel Data," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 51(1), pages 101-121, January.
    6. Dinçer, Gönül, 2014. "Turkey’s Rising Imports from BRICS: A Gravity Model Approach," MPRA Paper 61979, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Emla Fitzsimons & Vincent Hogan & J. Peter Neary, 1999. "Explaining the Volume of North-South Trade in Ireland - A Gravity Model Approach," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 30(4), pages 381-401.
    8. Zhang, Daowei & Li, Yanshu, 2009. "Forest endowment, logging restrictions, and China's wood products trade," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 46-53, March.
    9. Emla Fitzsimons & Vincent (Vincent Peter) Hogan & J. Peter Neary, 1999. "Explaining the volume of north south trade : a gravity model approach," Open Access publications 10197/48, School of Economics, University College Dublin.
    10. Walid Hejazi, 2005. "Are Regional Concentrations of OECD Exports and Outward FDI Consistent with Gravity?," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 33(4), pages 423-436, December.
    11. Brülhart, Marius & Trionfetti, Federico, 2009. "A test of trade theories when expenditure is home biased," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(7), pages 830-845, October.
    12. Theo S. Eicher & Christian Henn, 2011. "One Money, One Market: A Revised Benchmark," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(3), pages 419-435, August.
    13. Carrillo-Tudela, Carlos & A Li, Carmen, 2004. "Trade Blocks and the Gravity Model: Evidence from Latin American Countries," Journal of Economic Integration, Center for Economic Integration, Sejong University, vol. 19, pages 667-689.
    14. E. Young Song, 2011. "On Gravity, Specialization and Intra‐industry Trade," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(3), pages 494-508, August.
    15. Thomas Orliac, 2012. "The economics of trade facilitation [L'économie de la facilitation des échanges]," SciencePo Working papers Main tel-03681980, HAL.
    16. Belkacem Laabas and Walid Abdmoulah, "undated". "Determinants of Arab Intraregional Foreign Direct Investments," API-Working Paper Series 0905, Arab Planning Institute - Kuwait, Information Center.
    17. Jacks, David S. & Meissner, Christopher M. & Novy, Dennis, 2011. "Trade booms, trade busts, and trade costs," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 185-201, March.
    18. Paas, Tiiu, 2002. "Gravity approach for exploring Baltic Sea regional integration in the field of international trade," HWWA Discussion Papers 180, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWA).
    19. Baier, Scott L. & Bergstrand, Jeffrey H., 2001. "The growth of world trade: tariffs, transport costs, and income similarity," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 1-27, February.
    20. Lionel Fontagné & Michaël Pajot & Jean-Michel Pasteels, 2002. "Potentiels de commerce entre économies hétérogènes : un petit mode d'emploi des modèles de gravité," Economie & Prévision, La Documentation Française, vol. 0(1), pages 115-139.

    More about this item

    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:cje:issued:v:37:y:2004:i:1:p:199-218. 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: Prof. Werner Antweiler (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ceaaaea.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.