IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/331435.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Binding overhang and tariff-cutting formulas: A systematic, world-wide quantitative assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Bchir, Mohamed Hedi
  • Jean, Sébastien
  • Laborde, David

Abstract

Based on WTO’s Consolidated Tariff Schedules (CTS) database and on national sources, we propose a systematic assessment of ad valorem-equivalent bound duties at the detailed product level, for almost all WTO members. In doing this in a way fully consistent with the assessment of applied protection provided in the MAcMap-HS6 database (Bouët et al., 2004), we build a unique tool allowing the full structure of protection –bound, MFN applied, preferential applied duties- to be accurately assessed. We use this database to provide with a worldwide assessment of the binding overhang, i.e. the gap between bound and applied MFN tariffs. We also assess the likely applied-protection impact of an agreement in the Doha Round, based on the Harbinson Proposal for agricultural products, and on the Girard Proposal for non-agricultural products. In all cases, we show the difference between bound and applied protection to be key in understanding both the structure of protection worldwide, and the possible impact of liberalisation scenario cutting bound duties, as uses to be the case in multilateral liberalisations.

Suggested Citation

  • Bchir, Mohamed Hedi & Jean, Sébastien & Laborde, David, 2005. "Binding overhang and tariff-cutting formulas: A systematic, world-wide quantitative assessment," Conference papers 331435, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:331435
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/331435/files/2147.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joseph F. Francois & Ian Wooton, 2001. "Trade in International Transport Services: The Role of Competition," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(2), pages 249-261, May.
    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. Hummels, David & Lugovskyy, Volodymyr & Skiba, Alexandre, 2009. "The trade reducing effects of market power in international shipping," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 84-97, May.
    2. Matsushima, Noriaki & Takauchi, Kazuhiro, 2014. "Port privatization in an international oligopoly," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 382-397.
    3. Gerda Dewit & Dermot Leahy, 2009. "Oligopsonistic Cats and Dogs," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 35(3), pages 257-274, November.
    4. Christophe Gouel & Nina Kousnetzoff & Hassan Salman, 2008. "Commerce international et transports : tendances du passe et prospective 2020," Working Papers 2008-28, CEPII research center.
    5. María C. Latorre & Zoryana Olekseyuk & Hidemichi Yonezawa, 2020. "Foreign multinationals in service sectors: A general equilibrium analysis of Brexit," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(11), pages 2830-2859, November.
    6. Tarr, David, 2012. "Impact of services liberalization on industry productivity, exports and development : six empirical studies in the transition countries," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6023, The World Bank.
    7. Alan V. Deardorff & Indira Rajaraman, 2009. "Buyer Concentration in Markets for Developing Country Exports," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(2), pages 190-199, May.
    8. Elisabeth M. Christen & Joseph Francois & Bernard Hoekman, 2012. "CGE Modeling of Market Access in Services," Economics working papers 2012-08, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
    9. Anderson, Kym & Kurzweil, Marianne & Martin, William J. & Sandri, Damiano & Valenzuela, Ernesto, 2008. "Methodology for Measuring Distortions to Agricultural Incentives," Agricultural Distortions Working Paper Series 48326, World Bank.
    10. Kazuhiro Takauchi & Tomomichi Mizuno, 2022. "Endogenous transport price, R&D spillovers, and trade," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(5), pages 1477-1500, May.
    11. Kazuhiro Takauchi & Tomomichi Mizuno, 2019. "Is competition in the transport industry bad?A welfare analysis of R&D with inter-regional transportation," Discussion Papers 1910, Graduate School of Economics, Kobe University.
    12. Ivanic, Maros & Martin, William J., 2010. "Promoting global agricultural growth and poverty reduction," 114th Seminar, April 15-16, 2010, Berlin, Germany 61098, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Takauchi, Kazuhiro & Mizuno, Tomomichi, 2019. "Solving a hold-up problem may harm all firms: Downstream R&D and transport-price contracts," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 29-49.
    14. Knobel, Alexander, 2016. "The influence of services trade liberalization on service flows and industry productivity in CIS countries and Russia," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 44, pages 75-99.
    15. Christen, Elisabeth & Francois, Joseph & Hoekman, Bernard, 2013. "Computable General Equilibrium Modeling of Market Access in Services," Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, in: Peter B. Dixon & Dale Jorgenson (ed.), Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 1601-1643, Elsevier.
    16. Saggi, Kamal, 2003. "Trading Market Access for Competition Policy Enforcement," CEPR Discussion Papers 4110, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Bernard Hoekman & Patrick Messerlin, 2002. "Initial conditions and incentives for Arab economic integration : can the European Community's success be emulated?," Working Papers hal-03607662, HAL.
    18. Ferrantino, Michael J., 2012. "Using supply chain analysis to examine the costs of non-tariff measures (NTMs) and the benefits of trade facilitation," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2012-02, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    19. Francois, Joseph & Wooton, Ian, 2001. "Market structure, trade liberalization and the GATS," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 389-402, June.
    20. Takauchi, Kazuhiro, 2015. "Strategic export policy, monopoly carrier, and product differentiation," MPRA Paper 66003, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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:331435. 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.