IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/oxecpp/v49y1997i2p228-34.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regionalism and the Rest of the World: The Irrelevance of the Kemp-Wan Theorem

Author

Listed:
  • Winters, L Alan

Abstract

Many commentators purport to use the Kemp-Wan (1976) theorem to discuss the effects of regional integration schemes on nonmember countries and to operationalize the theorem in terms of the share of member countries' imports coming from nonmembers. The author shows that Kemp and Wan say nothing about changes in nonmember welfare and that the latter is more closely related to nonmembers' imports than to their shares of members' markets. The author suggests that a new approach to this issue is required. Copyright 1997 by Royal Economic Society.

Suggested Citation

  • Winters, L Alan, 1997. "Regionalism and the Rest of the World: The Irrelevance of the Kemp-Wan Theorem," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(2), pages 228-234, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:oxecpp:v:49:y:1997:i:2:p:228-34
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0030-7653%28199704%292%3A49%3A2%3C228%3ARATROT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-X&origin=bc
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to JSTOR subscribers. See http://www.jstor.org for details.
    ---><---

    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:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Srinivasan, T. N., 1997. "The common external tariff of a customs union: Alternative approaches," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 447-465, December.
    2. Bagwell,K. & Staiger,R.W., 1999. "Multilateral trade negotiations, bilateral opportunism and the rules of GATT," Working papers 6, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
    3. Souleymane COULIBALY, 2006. "Evaluating the Trade and Welfare Effects of Developing RTAs," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'économie 06.03, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, Département d’économie.
    4. Howard J. Wall, 2002. "Has Japan been left out in the cold by regional integration?," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, vol. 84(Sep), pages 25-36.
    5. Schiff, Maurice & Chang, Won, 2003. "Market presence, contestability, and the terms-of-trade effects of regional integration," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 161-175, May.
    6. Lucian Cernat, 2003. "Assessing South–South Regional Integration: Same Issues, Many Metrics," UNCTAD Blue Series Papers 21, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.
    7. Céline CARRERE, 2011. "A new measure of tariff preference margins adjusted for import and domestic competition," Working Papers P19, FERDI.
    8. Lucian Cernat, 2001. "ASSESSING REGIONAL TRADE ARRANGEMENTS: ARE SOUTH–SOUTH RTAs MORE TRADE DIVERTING?," International Trade 0109001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Dunning John H. & Lundan Sarianna M. & Eckes Alfred E. & Bryant Sarah K. & Unger Michael L. & Shelburne Robert C. & Cernat Lucian, 2001. "Global Economy Quarterly, Issue 3," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 2(3), pages 109-109, December.
    10. Tomaselli, Nicolo, 2005. "Economic Partnership Agreements: Redesigning trade and development among EU and ACP Countries," DEIAgra Working Papers 14863, Alma Mater Studiorum - University of Bologna, Department of Agricultural Economics and Agricultural Engineering.
    11. Paul Missios & Halis Murat Yildiz, 2017. "Do SouthSouth preferential trade agreements undermine the prospects for multilateral free trade?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 50(1), pages 111-161, February.
    12. de Melo, Jaime & Cadot, Olivier & Carrère, Céline & Portugal-Perez, Alberto, 2005. "How Much Market Access in FTAs? Textiles Under NAFTA," CEPR Discussion Papers 5051, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    13. Bagwell, Kyle & Staiger, Robert W., 2004. "Multilateral trade negotiations, bilateral opportunism and the rules of GATT/WTO," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 1-29, May.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F10 - International Economics - - Trade - - - General
    • I32 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Measurement and Analysis of Poverty

    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:oup:oxecpp:v:49:y:1997:i:2:p:228-34. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/oep .

    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.