IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/era/wpaper/dp-2014-18.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How Restrictive Are ASEAN's RoO?

Author

Listed:
  • Olivier CADOT

    (University of Lausanne, CEPR and FERDI)

  • Lili Yan ING

    (Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA) and University of Indonesia)

Abstract

This paper uses a disaggregated (product-level) gravity approach to estimate the effect of ASEAN’s product-specific rules of origin (RoO) on regional trade, using original data on rules applicable at the six-digit level of the harmonized system. Overall, we find that the average ad-valorem equivalent (AVE) of ASEAN’s RoO’s is 3.40 percent across all instruments and sectors. The trade-weighted average is 2.09 percent. This moderate estimate is in line with the existing literature. However, we also find fairly high AVEs for some sectors including leather, textile and apparel, footwear, and automobiles. We also find that some rules appear more restrictive than others; in this regard, the Textile Rule seems to stand out as a relatively more trade-inhibiting rule than others.

Suggested Citation

  • Olivier CADOT & Lili Yan ING, 2014. "How Restrictive Are ASEAN's RoO?," Working Papers DP-2014-18, Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA).
    • Handle: RePEc:era:wpaper:dp-2014-18
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.eria.org/ERIA-DP-2014-18.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Calvo-Pardo, Hector & Freund, Caroline & Ornelas, Emanuel, 2009. "The ASEAN free trade agreement : impact on trade flows and external trade barriers," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4960, The World Bank.
    2. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1995. "The Politics of Free-Trade Agreements," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 667-690, September.
    3. Joseph Francois & Bernard Hoekman & Miriam Manchin, 2006. "Preference Erosion and Multilateral Trade Liberalization," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 20(2), pages 197-216.
    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. repec:idb:brikps:16558 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Paul Brenton & Miriam Manchin, 2014. "Making EU Trade Agreements Work: The Role of Rules of Origin," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: INTERNATIONAL TRADE, DISTRIBUTION AND DEVELOPMENT Empirical Studies of Trade Policies, chapter 14, pages 299-313, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. Aaditya Mattoo & Devesh Roy & Arvind Subramanian, 2003. "The Africa Growth and Opportunity Act and its Rules of Origin: Generosity Undermined?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(6), pages 829-851, June.
    8. Richard E. Baldwin, 2011. "Multilateralising Regionalism: Spaghetti Bowls as Building Blocks on the Path to Global Free Trade," Chapters, in: Miroslav N. Jovanović (ed.), International Handbook on the Economics of Integration, Volume I, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Medalla, Erlinda M. & Balboa, Jenny D., 2009. "ASEAN Rules of Origin: Lessons and Recommendations for Best Practice," Discussion Papers DP 2009-36, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    10. Candau, Fabien & Jean, Sebastien, 2005. "What Are EU Trade Preferences Worth for Sub-Saharan Africa and Other Developing Countries?," Working Papers 18863, TRADEAG - Agricultural Trade Agreements.
    11. Portugal-Perez, Alberto, 2009. "Assessing the impact of political economy factors on rules of origin under NAFTA," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4848, The World Bank.
    12. Erlinda M. MEDALLA & Jenny BALBOA, 2009. "ASEAN Rules of Origin: Lessons and Recommendations for Best Practice," Working Papers d020, Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA).
    13. Leamer, Edward E, 1974. "The Commodity Composition of International Trade in Manufactures: An Empirical Analysis," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(3), pages 350-374, November.
    14. Robert Koopman & William Powers & Zhi Wang & Shang-Jin Wei, 2010. "Give Credit Where Credit Is Due: Tracing Value Added in Global Production Chains," NBER Working Papers 16426, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Céline Carrère & Jaime de Melo, 2015. "Are Different Rules of Origin Equally Costly? Estimates from NAFTA," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Developing Countries in the World Economy, chapter 12, pages 277-298, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    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. Mari Pangestu & Sjamsu Rahardja & Lili Yan Ing, 2015. "Fifty Years Of Trade Policy In Indonesia: New World Trade, Old Treatments," Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(2), pages 239-261, August.
    2. Lili Yan Ing & Shujiro Urata & Yoshifumi Fukunaga, . "How Do Exports and Imports Affect the Use of Free Trade Agreements? Firm-level Survey Evidence from Southeast Asia," Chapters,, Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA).

    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. Olivier Cadot & Lili Yan Ing, 2016. "How Restrictive Are ASEAN's Rules of Origin?," Asian Economic Papers, MIT Press, vol. 15(3), pages 115-134, Fall.
    2. Low, Patrick & Piermartini, Roberta & Richtering, Jurgen, 2005. "Multilateral solutions to the erosion of non-reciprocal preferences in NAMA," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2005-05, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    3. Sinéad Kelleher, 2012. "Playing by the Rules? The Development of an Amended Index to Measure the Impact of Rules of Origin on Intra-PTA Trade Flows," Working Papers 201222, School of Economics, University College Dublin.
    4. Bureau, Jean-Christophe & Chakir, Raja & Gallezot, Jacques, 2006. "The Utilisation of EU and US Trade Preferences for Developing Countries in the Agri-Food Sector," Working Papers 18867, TRADEAG - Agricultural Trade Agreements.
    5. Hoekman. Bernard & Prowse, Susan, 2005. "Economic policy responses to preference erosion : from trade as aid toaid for trade," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3721, The World Bank.
    6. Maria Cipollina & David Laborde Debucquet & Luca Salvatici, 2017. "The tide that does not raise all boats: an assessment of EU preferential trade policies," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 153(1), pages 199-231, February.
    7. Manchin, Miriam & Pelkmans-Balaoing, Annette O., 2008. "Clothes without an Emperor: Analysis of the preferential tariffs in ASEAN," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 213-223, June.
    8. Hamanaka, Shintaro, 2013. "A note on detecting biases in assessing the use of FTAs," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 24-32.
    9. Kala Krishna, 2005. "Understanding Rules of Origin," NBER Working Papers 11150, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Valentina Raimondi & Margherita Scoppola & Alessandro Olper, 2012. "The Impact of European Union Preferential Policies in the Rice Industry: A Dynamic Panel Gravity Approach," FOODSECURE Working papers 4, LEI Wageningen UR.
    11. Cooke, Edgar F. A., 2012. "Is the impact of AGOA heterogeneous?," MPRA Paper 43277, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. DeMaria, Federica & Drogue, Sophie & Matthews, Alan, 2008. "Agro-Food Preferences in the EU's GSP Scheme: An Analysis of Changes between 2004 and 2006," Working Papers 6151, TRADEAG - Agricultural Trade Agreements.
    13. Mariarosaria Agostino & Federica Demaria & Francesco Trivieri, 2010. "Non‐Reciprocal Trade Preferences and the Role of Compliance Costs in the Agricultural Sector: Exports to the EU," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 652-679, September.
    14. Moeller, Thordis & Grethe, Harald, 2010. "Climate Change and European Agriculture in 2050: Outlook for Cereal and Oilseed Markets," Conference papers 331938, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    15. Valentina Raimondi & Margherita Scoppola & Alessandro Olper, 2012. "Preference erosion and the developing countries exports to the EU: a dynamic panel gravity approach," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 148(4), pages 707-732, December.
    16. Fugazza, Marco & Nicita, Alessandro, 2013. "The direct and relative effects of preferential market access," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 357-368.
    17. Antoine Bouët & Lionel Fontagné & Sébastien Jean, 2005. "Is Erosion of Tariff Preferences a Serious Concern?," Working Papers 2005-14, CEPII research center.
    18. Denis Medvedev, 2010. "Preferential trade agreements and their role in world trade," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 146(2), pages 199-222, June.
    19. Nathalie Jorzik & Frank Mueller‐Langer, 2020. "Multilateral stability and efficiency of trade agreements: A network formation approach," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(2), pages 355-370, February.
    20. Yap, Josef T. & Medalla, Erlinda M. & Aldaba, Rafaelita M. & del Prado, Fatima & Mantaring, Melalyn C. & Rosellon, Maureen Ane D. & Ledda, Veredigna M., 2015. "How Are Firms Responding to Philippine Free Trade Agreements?," Discussion Papers DP 2015-22, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Rules of Origin; Gravity equation; International Trade; ASEAN; Global Value Chains;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F12 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Models of Trade with Imperfect Competition and Scale Economies; Fragmentation
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F14 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Empirical Studies of Trade
    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration

    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:era:wpaper:dp-2014-18. 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: Ranti Amelia (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eriadid.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.