IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ubzefd/6218.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Shadow Pricing Market Access: A Trade Benefit Function Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Chau, Nancy H.
  • Fare, Rolf

Abstract

Appropriate assessment of the social value of market access is at the core of a broad range of inquiries in trade research. A selection include: the appraisal of industry-level production and consumption distortions due to selective trade liberalization and partial tax reform; the construction of national-level quantity indicators of market access consistent with welfare change, and the use of international trade re-balancing as sanctions to discourage trade agreement violations, or as compensation in trade dispute settlement. In order to obtain shadow prices, we propose a new approach integrating the Luenberger benefit function and the directional output distance function. This yields a trade benefit function which represents trade preferences à la Meade in the context of a canonical general equilibrium model of trade. We first show that our approach is in keeping with well-established and commonly used measurement techniques of trade welfare, for the standard trade expenditure function is in fact dual to the trade benefit function. We then show that this dual relation allows for a direct retrieval of the shadow values of net imports from the trade benefit function. The usefulness and operationality of our approach is then demonstrated in a series of applications and simulations.

Suggested Citation

  • Chau, Nancy H. & Fare, Rolf, 2008. "Shadow Pricing Market Access: A Trade Benefit Function Approach," Discussion Papers 6218, University of Bonn, Center for Development Research (ZEF).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:ubzefd:6218
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.6218
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/6218/files/dp080121.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.6218?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Luenberger, David G., 1992. "Benefit functions and duality," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 461-481.
    2. Robert W. Staiger & Kyle Bagwell, 1999. "An Economic Theory of GATT," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 215-248, March.
    3. Nancy H. Chau & Rolf F”re & Shawna Grosskopf, 2003. "Trade restrictiveness and efficiency," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 44(3), pages 1079-1095, August.
    4. Keen, Michael & Ligthart, Jenny E., 2002. "Coordinating tariff reduction and domestic tax reform," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 489-507, March.
    5. Anderson, Kym, 2002. "Peculiarities of retaliation in WTO dispute settlement," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(2), pages 123-134, July.
    6. J. Christophe Bureau & Nancy H. Chau & Rolf Färe & Shawna Grosskopf, 2003. "Economic Performance, Trade Restrictiveness, and Efficiency," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(4), pages 527-542, November.
    7. Kawamata, Kunio, 1974. "Price Distortion and Potential Welfare," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 42(3), pages 435-460, May.
    8. Balassa, Bela, 1985. "Exports, policy choices, and economic growth in developing countries after the 1973 oil shock," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 23-35.
    9. John Kennan & Raymond Riezman, 2013. "Do Big Countries Win Tariff Wars?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Raymond Riezman (ed.), International Trade Agreements and Political Economy, chapter 4, pages 45-51, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    10. Butler, Monika & Hauser, Heinz, 2000. "The WTO Dispute Settlement System: First Assessment from an Economic Perspective," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 503-533, October.
    11. Edward E. Leamer, 1988. "Measures of Openness," NBER Chapters, in: Trade Policy Issues and Empirical Analysis, pages 145-204, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Maria Cipollina & Luca Salvatici, 2008. "Measuring Protection: Mission Impossible?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 577-616, July.
    13. Alan V. Deardorff, 2011. "The General Validity of the Law of Comparative Advantage," 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 10, pages 73-90, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    14. Chad P. Bown, 2005. "Participation in," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 19(2), pages 287-310.
    15. Robert E. Baldwin, 1989. "Measuring Nontariff Trade Policies," NBER Working Papers 2978, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Harry G. Johnson, 1953. "Optimum Tariffs and Retaliation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 21(2), pages 142-153.
    17. Michael, Michael S. & Hatzipanayotou, Panos & Miller, Stephen M., 1993. "Integrated reforms of tariffs and consumption taxes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 417-428, October.
    18. A. D. Woodland, 1980. "Direct and Indirect Trade Utility Functions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 47(5), pages 907-926.
    19. Green, Jerry R. & Scheinkman, Josè Alexandre (ed.), 1979. "General Equilibrium, Growth, and Trade," Elsevier Monographs, Elsevier, edition 1, number 9780122987502.
    20. Mayer, Wolfgang, 1981. "Theoretical Considerations on Negotiated Tariff Adjustments," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(1), pages 135-153, March.
    21. R. G. Lipsey & Kelvin Lancaster, 1956. "The General Theory of Second Best," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 24(1), pages 11-32.
    22. Chad P. Bown, 2002. "The Economics of Trade Disputes, the GATT’s Article XXIII, and the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Understanding," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(3), pages 283-323, November.
    23. Rolf Färe & Shawna Grosskopf, 2000. "Theory and Application of Directional Distance Functions," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 93-103, March.
    24. Chipman, John S. & Moore, James C., 1972. "Social utility and the gains from trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(2), pages 157-172, May.
    25. Chambers, Robert G. & Chung, Yangho & Fare, Rolf, 1996. "Benefit and Distance Functions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 407-419, August.
    26. Robert E. Baldwin, 1988. "Trade Policy Issues and Empirical Analysis," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number bald88-2.
    27. W. Erwin Diewert & Alan D. Woodland, 2004. "The Gains from Trade and Policy Reform Revisited," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(4), pages 591-608, September.
    28. Horn, Henrik & Mavroidis, Petros C & Nordström, Håkan, 1999. "Is The Use Of The WTO Dispute Settlement System Biased?," CEPR Discussion Papers 2340, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    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. Valentin Zelenyuk, 2011. "A Scale Elasticity Measure for Directional Distance Function and its Dual," CEPA Working Papers Series WP062011, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    2. K. K. G. Wong, 2013. "Trade distance functions and the derivation of inverse demand for imports," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(29), pages 4160-4168, October.

    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. Fritz Breuss, 2004. "WTO Dispute Settlement: An Economic Analysis of Four EU–US Mini Trade Wars—A Survey," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 4(4), pages 275-315, December.
    2. Fritz Breuss, 2004. "WTO Dispute Settlement: An Economic Analysis of four EU-US Mini Trade Wars," WIFO Working Papers 231, WIFO.
    3. Götz, Christian & Heckelei, Thomas & Rudloff, Bettina, 2010. "What makes countries initiate WTO disputes on food-related issues?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 154-162, April.
    4. Maria Cipollina & Luca Salvatici, 2008. "Measuring Protection: Mission Impossible?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 577-616, July.
    5. Arribas, Iván & Bensassi, Sami & Tortosa-Ausina, Emili, 2020. "Trade integration in the European Union: Openness, interconnectedness, and distance," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    6. Iván Arribas & Francisco Pérez & Emili Tortosa-Ausina, 2014. "The dynamics of international trade integration: 1967–2004," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 19-41, February.
    7. Jean-Marc Malambwe Kilolo, 2018. "An elementary model of export tax war," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 154(2), pages 307-325, May.
    8. Robert W. Staiger & Kyle Bagwell, 1999. "An Economic Theory of GATT," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 215-248, March.
    9. Opp, Marcus M., 2010. "Tariff wars in the Ricardian Model with a continuum of goods," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 212-225, March.
    10. Ralph Ossa, 2011. "A "New Trade" Theory of GATT/WTO Negotiations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 119(1), pages 122-152.
    11. Bagwell,K. & Staiger,R.W., 2000. "GATT-think," Working papers 19, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
    12. Bernstein, Jeffrey R. & Weinstein, David E., 2002. "Do endowments predict the location of production?: Evidence from national and international data," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 55-76, January.
    13. Pritchett, Lant, 1996. "Measuring outward orientation in LDCs: Can it be done?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 307-335, May.
    14. Eromenko, Igor, 2010. "Accession to the WTO. Computable General Equilibrium Analysis: the Case of Ukraine. Part II," MPRA Paper 67452, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Florian Freund, 2017. "Reciprocal Tariff Reductions Under Asymmetric Bargaining Power," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(5), pages 978-992, May.
    16. Jean‐Marc Malambwe Kilolo, 2021. "Country asymmetry, trade agreements, and transfers," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(1), pages 37-51, March.
    17. Collie, David R., 2019. "Trade Wars under Oligopoly: Who Wins and is Free Trade Sustainable?," Cardiff Economics Working Papers E2019/4, Cardiff University, Cardiff Business School, Economics Section.
    18. BREUSS Fritz, 2010. "WTO Dispute Settlement in Action: An Economic Analysis of four EU-US Mini Trade Wars," EcoMod2003 330700026, EcoMod.
    19. Eromenko, Igor, 2011. "Accession to the WTO. Computable General Equilibrium Analysis: the Case of Ukraine," MPRA Paper 67535, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Francois, Joseph & Horn, Henrik & Kaunitz, Niklas, 2008. "Trading Profiles and Developing Country Participation in the WTO Dispute Settlement System," Working Paper Series 730, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    International Relations/Trade; Research Methods/ Statistical Methods;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:ubzefd:6218. 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/zefbnde.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.