IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/331248.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Market Access in Non-Agricultural Goods: What is at stake in the Development Round?

Author

Listed:
  • Bchir, Mohamed Hedi
  • Fontagné, Lionel
  • Jean, Sébastien

Abstract

The Doha ministerial declaration concerning market access for non-agricultural products states that negotiations should aim, by modalities to be agreed, to reduce or as appropriate eliminate tariffs, including the reduction or elimination of tariff peaks. This study proposes a CGE assessment of the impact of various modalities of such liberalisation. Scenarios considered include the Girard's proposal (with alternative choices for the involved coefficient), the removal of tariff peaks and complete liberalisation. A special and differential treatment (SDT) for developing countries is also considered. Existing preferential trade arrangements are taken into account exhaustively, based on the MAcMap database, and tariff cuts are computed at the HS-6 product level. In addition, in order to assess properly the context in which such liberalisation is likely to take place, a pre-experiment simulation is carried out, including the MFA, China and Russia accession to the WTO, and the extension of AGOA to all sub-Saharan African countries. The impact of these scenarios is finally assessed using MIRAGE, a CGE model incorporating imperfect competition used here in its static version. The results show that liberalising non-agricultural market access is welfare improving at the world level, but that this is mainly due to the removal of tariff peaks. Crosscountry distributive impacts prove significant, and are strongly altered by granting developing countries with a SDT.

Suggested Citation

  • Bchir, Mohamed Hedi & Fontagné, Lionel & Jean, Sébastien, 2004. "Market Access in Non-Agricultural Goods: What is at stake in the Development Round?," Conference papers 331248, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:331248
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/331248/files/1709.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Volker Nitsch, 2000. "National borders and international trade: evidence from the European Union," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 33(4), pages 1091-1105, November.
    2. Soloaga, Isidro & Alan Wintersb, L., 2001. "Regionalism in the nineties: what effect on trade?," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 1-29, March.
    3. Keith Head & John Ries, 2001. "Increasing Returns versus National Product Differentiation as an Explanation for the Pattern of U.S.-Canada Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 858-876, September.
    4. Huiwen Lai & Daniel Trefler, 2002. "The Gains from Trade with Monopolistic Competition: Specification, Estimation, and Mis-Specification," NBER Working Papers 9169, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Andrew K. Rose, 2000. "One money, one market: the effect of common currencies on trade," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 15(30), pages 08-45.
    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. de Sousa, José & Mayer, Thierry & Zignago, Soledad, 2012. "Market access in global and regional trade," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 1037-1052.
    2. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/10187 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/10187 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2004. "Trade Costs," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(3), pages 691-751, September.
    5. Combes, Pierre-Philippe & Lafourcade, Miren & Mayer, Thierry, 2003. "Can Business and Social Networks Explain the Border Effect Puzzle?," CEPR Discussion Papers 3750, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. de Sousa, José & Mayer, Thierry & Zignago, Soledad, 2012. "Market access in global and regional trade," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 1037-1052.
    7. Combes, Pierre-Philippe & Lafourcade, Miren & Mayer, Thierry, 2005. "The trade-creating effects of business and social networks: evidence from France," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 1-29, May.
    8. Lionel Fontagne & Soledad Zignago, 2007. "A Re-evaluation of the Impact of Regional Agreements on Trade Patterns," Economie Internationale, CEPII research center, issue 109, pages 31-51.
    9. Scott L. Baier & Amanda Kerr & Yoto V. Yotov, 2018. "Gravity, distance, and international trade," Chapters, in: Bruce A. Blonigen & Wesley W. Wilson (ed.), Handbook of International Trade and Transportation, chapter 2, pages 15-78, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Head, Keith & Mayer, Thierry, 2014. "Gravity Equations: Workhorse,Toolkit, and Cookbook," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 131-195, Elsevier.
    11. Chen, Natalie & Novy, Dennis, 2008. "International Trade Integration: A Disaggregated Approach," CEPR Discussion Papers 7103, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. Lionel Fontagné & Thierry Mayer & Soledad Zignago, 2005. "Trade in the Triad: how easy is the access to large markets?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 38(4), pages 1401-1430, November.
    13. Jan Fidrmuc & Jarko Fidrmuc, 2003. "Disintegration and Trade," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(5), pages 811-829, November.
    14. 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.
    15. Gil-Pareja, Salvador & Llorca-Vivero, Rafael & Martínez-Serrano, José Antonio, 2008. "Trade effects of monetary agreements: Evidence for OECD countries," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 733-755, May.
    16. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/10187 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Farha Fatema & Mohammad Monirul Islam, 2020. "Driving Forces of Marine Fisheries and Seafood Export of Bangladesh: Augmented Gravity Model Approach," Asian Journal of Economic Modelling, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 8(2), pages 106-122, June.
    18. Chen, Natalie & Novy, Dennis, 2011. "Gravity, trade integration, and heterogeneity across industries," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 206-221.
    19. Fetzer, James J. & Rivera, Sandra A., 2005. "Modeling Modifications in Rules of Origin: A Partial Equilibrium Approach," Conference papers 331372, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    20. Zouri, Stéphane, 2019. "Business cycles,bilateral trade and international financial intergration : Evidence from Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)," MPRA Paper 98748, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    21. Fidrmuc, Jarko & Fidrmuc, Jan, 2000. "Integration, disintegration and trade in Europe: Evolution of trade relations during the 1990s," ZEI Working Papers B 03-2000, University of Bonn, ZEI - Center for European Integration Studies.
    22. Michalski, Tomasz & Ors, Evren, 2012. "(Interstate) Banking and (interstate) trade: Does real integration follow financial integration?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(1), pages 89-117.
    23. Frankel, Jeffrey, 2008. "Should Eastern European Countries Join the Euro? A Review and Update of Trade Estimates and Consideration of Endogenous OCA Criteria," Working Paper Series rwp08-059, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.

    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:ags:pugtwp:331248. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gtpurus.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.