IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_2111.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Competitiveness – A Comparison of China and Mexico

Author

Listed:
  • Immaculada Martínez-Zarzoso
  • Felicitas Nowak-Lehmann D.
  • Sebastian Vollmer

Abstract

Latin American countries have lost competitiveness in world markets in comparison to China over the last two decades. The main purpose of this study is to examine the causes of this development. To this end an augmented Ricardian model is estimated using panel data. The explanatory variables considered are productivity, unit labor costs, unit values, trade costs, price levels (in PPP), and real exchange rates in relative terms. Due to data restrictions, China’s relative exports (to the US, Argentina, Japan, Korea, UK, Germany, and Spain) will be compared to Mexico’s exports for a number of sectors over a period of eleven years. Panel and pooled estimation techniques (SUR-estimation, panel Feasible Generalized Least Squares (panel/pooled FGLS)) will be utilized to better control for country-specific effects (differences between American, Argentinian, Japanese, Korean, German, British, and Spanish markets), cross-section specific (sector-specific) effects, and correlation over time.

Suggested Citation

  • Immaculada Martínez-Zarzoso & Felicitas Nowak-Lehmann D. & Sebastian Vollmer, 2007. "Competitiveness – A Comparison of China and Mexico," CESifo Working Paper Series 2111, CESifo.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_2111
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp2111.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ehsan U. Choudhri & Lawrence L. Schembri, 2002. "Productivity performance and international competitiveness: an old test reconsidered," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(2), pages 341-362, May.
    2. Alan V. Deardorff, 2014. "Local comparative advantage: Trade costs and the pattern of trade," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 10(1), pages 9-35, March.
    3. Alejandro Cuñat & Marco Maffezzoli, 2007. "Can Comparative Advantage Explain the Growth of us Trade?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 117(520), pages 583-602, April.
    4. Lücke, Matthias & Rothert, Jacek, 2006. "Central Asia's comparative advantage in international trade," Kiel Economic Policy Papers 6, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    5. Robert M. Stern, 1962. "British And American Productivity And Comparative Costs In International Trade," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(3), pages 275-296.
    6. Busse, Matthias, 2003. "Tariffs, Transport Costs and the WTO Doha Round: The Case of Developing Countries," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 4(1), pages 1-17.
    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. Ceglowski Janet & Golub Stephen S., 2012. "Does China Still Have a Labor Cost Advantage?," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 12(3), pages 1-30, September.

    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. Nowak-Lehmann D., Felicitas & Vollmer, Sebastian & Martínez-Zarzoso, Inmaculada, 2008. "Does comparative advantage make countries competitive? A comparison of China and Mexico," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 74, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    2. repec:got:cegedp:74 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Costinot, Arnaud & Komunjer, Ivana, 2006. "What Good Do Countries Trade? New Ricardian Predictions," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series qt9t9818ng, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
    4. William R Kerr, 2018. "Heterogeneous Technology Diffusion and Ricardian Trade Patterns," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 32(1), pages 163-182.
    5. Sèna Kimm Gnangnon, 2022. "Do Aid for Trade Flows Help Reduce the Shadow Economy in Recipient Countries?," Economies, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-33, December.
    6. Morgenroth, Edgar & FitzGerald, John & FitzGerald, John, 2006. "Summary and Conclusions," Book Chapters, in: Morgenroth, Edgar (ed.),Ex-Ante Evaluation of the Investment Priorities for the National Development Plan 2007-2013, chapter 24, pages 317-333, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
      • Baker, Terence J. & FitzGerald, John & Honohan, Patrick & FitzGerald, John & Honohan, Patrick, 1996. "Summary and Conclusions," Book Chapters, in: Baker, Terence J. (ed.),Economic Implications for Ireland of EMU, chapter 12, pages 339-352, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    7. Jota Ishikawa & Nori Tarui, 2015. "Backfiring with backhaul problems: Trade and Industrial Policies with Endogenous Transport Costs," Working Papers 201514, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Economics.
    8. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2023. "Duration of membership in the world trade organization and investment-oriented remittances inflows," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 258-277.
    9. Gouranga Gopal Das & Soamiely Andriamananjara, 2006. "Hub-and-Spokes Free Trade Agreements in the Presence of Technology Spillovers: An Application to the Western Hemisphere," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 142(1), pages 33-66, April.
    10. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2022. "Duration of WTO Membership and Investment-Oriented Remittances Flows," EconStor Preprints 251274, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    11. Wolf, Nikolaus, 2009. "Was Germany Ever United? Evidence from Intra- and International Trade, 1885–1933," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 69(3), pages 846-881, September.
    12. Elhanan Helpman, 1999. "The Structure of Foreign Trade," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 13(2), pages 121-144, Spring.
    13. Raphael A. Auer, 2013. "Product Heterogeneity, Cross-Country Taste Differences, and the Consumption Home Bias," Working Papers 13.01, Swiss National Bank, Study Center Gerzensee.
    14. repec:bdi:workqs:qse_9 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Tamir Agmon, 2010. "Markets Globalisation by Firms from Emerging Markets and Small Countries," Review of Market Integration, India Development Foundation, vol. 2(2-3), pages 291-316, August.
    16. Tongsheng Xu & Xiao Liang, 2017. "Measuring aggregate trade costs and its empirical effects on manufacturing export composition in China," China Finance and Economic Review, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 1-18, December.
    17. Cuñat Alejandro & Maffezzoli Marco, 2007. "Specialization Patterns and the Factor Bias of Technology," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-27, July.
    18. Biswajit Mandal & Sugata Marjit, 2012. "Capital inflow, vanishing sector and wage distribution in an economy with corruption related intermediation," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 32(3), pages 2128-2135.
    19. Raphael Auer, 2009. "Product Heterogeneity, Within-Industry Trade Patterns, and the Home Bias of Consumption?," Working Papers 09.05, Swiss National Bank, Study Center Gerzensee.
    20. James Harrigan & Haiyan Deng, 2010. "China's Local Comparative Advantage," NBER Chapters, in: China's Growing Role in World Trade, pages 109-133, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Elizaveta Archanskaia, 2013. "Proximity as a Source of Comparative Advantage," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-01070440, HAL.
    22. Daniel Bernhofen, 2010. "The Empirics of General Equilibrium Tade Theory: What Have we Learned?," CESifo Working Paper Series 3242, CESifo.

    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:ces:ceswps:_2111. 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.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.