IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdf/wpaper/2015-17.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evaluating European trading arrangements

Author

Listed:

Abstract

The EU protects agriculture and manufacturing through its commercial policies, namely its tariffs, its non-tariff barriers and the Common Agricultural Policy. By leaving the EU the UK would be able to abandon the EU s protectionist system in favour of free trade combined with transitional compensation for those hit by the changes. This would raise economic welfare by around 4% (i.e. UK households would be able to consume 4% more goods and services) and enhance the shift of the UK economy away from manufacturing into service industries where UK growth has been concentrated largely in the decades since 1979. As the UK is a small country with little if any monopoly power in world markets, bilateral trade agreements have trivial effects on it.

Suggested Citation

  • Minford, Patrick, 2015. "Evaluating European trading arrangements," Cardiff Economics Working Papers E2015/17, Cardiff University, Cardiff Business School, Economics Section.
    • Handle: RePEc:cdf:wpaper:2015/17
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://carbsecon.com/wp/E2015_17.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Scott Bradford, 2003. "Paying the Price: Final Goods Protection in OECD Countries," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(1), pages 24-37, February.
    2. Le, Vo Phuong Mai & Minford, Patrick & Nowell, Eric, 2009. "Economic Policy: protectionism as an elite strategy," Cardiff Economics Working Papers E2009/1, Cardiff University, Cardiff Business School, Economics Section.
    3. Costinot, Arnaud & Rodríguez-Clare, Andrés, 2014. "Trade Theory with Numbers: Quantifying the Consequences of Globalization," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 197-261, Elsevier.
    4. Scott Bradford & Robert Z. Lawrence, 2004. "Has Globalization Gone Far Enough: The Costs of Fragmented Markets," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 349, April.
    5. Patrick Minford & Sakshi Gupta & Vo P.M. Le & Vidya Mahambare & Yongdeng Xu, 2015. "Should Britain Leave the EU?," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 16679.
    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. Nicolo' Tamberi, 2020. "Export-platform FDI and Brexit Uncertainty," Working Paper Series 0320, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.

    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. Latorre, María C. & Olekseyuk, Zoryana & Yonezawa, Hidemichi & Robinson, Sherman, 2020. "Making sense of Brexit losses: An in-depth review of macroeconomic studies," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 72-87.
    2. Patrick Minford, 2006. "Measuring the Economic Costs and Benefits of the EU," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 509-524, December.
    3. Simonovska, Ina & Waugh, Michael E., 2014. "The elasticity of trade: Estimates and evidence," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 34-50.
    4. Guillaume Daudin, 2005. "Les transactions de la mondialisation," Revue de l'OFCE, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 92(1), pages 221-262.
    5. Patrick Minford & Yongdeng Xu, 2018. "Classical or Gravity? Which Trade Model Best Matches the UK Facts?," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 579-611, July.
    6. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/686 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Gang Chen & Xue Dong & Patrick Minford & Guanhua Qiu & Yongdeng Xu & Zequn Xu, 2022. "Computable General Equilibrium Models of Trade in the Modern Trade Policy Debate," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 271-309, April.
    8. Michael Waugh & Ina Simonovska, 2012. "Different Trade Models, Different Trade Elasticities?," 2012 Meeting Papers 618, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    9. Gabriela Ortiz Valverde & Maria C. Latorre, 2020. "A computable general equilibrium analysis of Brexit: Barriers to trade and immigration restrictions," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 705-728, March.
    10. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/686 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Mike Waugh, 2014. "TradeModels and Trade Elasticities," 2014 Meeting Papers 953, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    12. Vo Phuong Mai Le & Patrick Minford & Eric Nowell, 2011. "Measuring the Extent and Costs of EU Protectionism," Chapters, in: Miroslav N. Jovanović (ed.), International Handbook on the Economics of Integration, Volume III, chapter 15, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Njike, Arnold, 2020. "Trade in value-added and the welfare gains of international fragmentation," MPRA Paper 100427, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Hylke Vandenbussche & William Connell & Wouter Simons, 2022. "Global value chains, trade shocks and jobs: An application to Brexit," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(8), pages 2338-2369, August.
    15. Foellmi, Reto & Hepenstrick, Christian & Torun, David, 2022. "Triangle Inequalities in International Trade: The Neglected Dimension," CEPR Discussion Papers 17118, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Xu, Chenzi & Yang, He, 2024. "Real effects of supplying safe private money," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    17. Liu, Chen & Ma, Xiao, 2018. "China's Export Surge and the New Margins of Trade," MPRA Paper 103970, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Oct 2020.
    18. Pablo D. Fajgelbaum & Edouard Schaal, 2020. "Optimal Transport Networks in Spatial Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(4), pages 1411-1452, July.
    19. Lorenzo Caliendo & Luca David Opromolla & Fernando Parro & Alessandro Sforza, 2021. "Goods and Factor Market Integration: A Quantitative Assessment of the EU Enlargement," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(12), pages 3491-3545.
    20. Victor Ginsburgh & Shlomo Weber, 2020. "The Economics of Language," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 58(2), pages 348-404, June.
    21. Beniamino Quintieri & Giovanni Stamato, 2023. "Are preferential agreements beneficial to EU trade? New evidence from the EU–South Korea treaty," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(12), pages 3511-3541, December.
    22. Evgeny N. Smirnov & Sergey A. Lukyanov, 2021. "Instability of international trade and approaches to optimal regulation," Upravlenets, Ural State University of Economics, vol. 12(5), pages 21-31, November.

    More about this item

    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:cdf:wpaper:2015/17. 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: Yongdeng Xu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecscfuk.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.