IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/4465.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Domino Theory of Regionalism

Author

Listed:
  • Richard Baldwin

Abstract

Regional liberalization sweeps the globe like wildfire while multilateral trade talks proceed at a glacial pace. Why are countries eager to liberalize regionally but reluctant to do so multilaterally? The answer of the GATT-is-dead school is that multilateralism is too cumbersome for contemporary trade issues. This paper proposes a very different answer. Recent regionalism is caused by two idiosyncratic events multiplied by a domino effect. The triggering events – the U.S.-Mexico FTA and the EC's 1992 programme – had nothing to do with GATT's health. The domino effect is simple. Political equilibria, which balance anti- and pro-membership forces, determine governments' stances on regional liberalization. Domestic exporters to regional blocs are a powerful pro-membership constituency. An event that triggers closer integration within an existing bloc harms the profits of nonmember exporters, thus stimulating them to boost their pro-membership political activity. The extra activity alters the political equilibrium, leading some countries to join. This enlargement further harms nonmember exporters since they now face a disadvantage in a greater number of markets. This second round effect brings forth more pro-membership political activity and a further enlargement of the bloc. The new political equilibrium is marked by larger regional trading blocs. In the meantime regionalism appears to spread like wildfire.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard Baldwin, 1993. "A Domino Theory of Regionalism," NBER Working Papers 4465, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:4465
    Note: ITI
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w4465.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dixit, Avinash K & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1977. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 297-308, June.
    2. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1994. "Protection for Sale," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 833-850, September.
    3. Krugman, Paul, 1991. "Increasing Returns and Economic Geography," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(3), pages 483-499, June.
    4. Krugman, Paul R., 1979. "Increasing returns, monopolistic competition, and international trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 469-479, November.
    5. Mayer, Wolfgang, 1984. "Endogenous Tariff Formation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(5), pages 970-985, December.
    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. Rauscher, Michael, 2001. "International trade, foreign investment, and the environment," Thuenen-Series of Applied Economic Theory 29, University of Rostock, Institute of Economics.
    2. Hazel Parcon, 2008. "Disaggregating PTAs at the Role of International Division of Labor on PTA Formation," Working Papers 200806, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Economics.
    3. Fujita, Masahisa & Thisse, Jacques-François, 2009. "New Economic Geography: An appraisal on the occasion of Paul Krugman's 2008 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 109-119, March.
    4. J.Peter Neary, 2001. "Of Hype and Hyperbolas: Introducing the New Economic Geography," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 39(2), pages 536-561, June.
    5. Gali, Jordi, 1995. "Expectations-driven spatial fluctuations," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-19, February.
    6. repec:wsr:wpaper:y:2013:i:124 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Pao-Li Chang, 2002. "Endogenous Tariff Formation with Intra-Industry Trade," Working Papers 476, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    8. James R. Markusen & Anthony J. Venables, 2021. "The theory of endowment, intra-industry and multi-national trade," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: BROADENING TRADE THEORY Incorporating Market Realities into Traditional Models, chapter 4, pages 69-94, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    9. Heiland, Inga & Kohler, Wilhelm, 2022. "Heterogeneous workers, trade, and migration," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    10. Fabien Candau, 2008. "Entrepreneurs' Location Choice And Public Policies: A Survey Of The New Economic Geography," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 909-952, December.
    11. Stephen J. Redding, 2013. "Economic Geography: A Review of the Theoretical and Empirical Literature," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Daniel Bernhofen & Rod Falvey & David Greenaway & Udo Kreickemeier (ed.), Palgrave Handbook of International Trade, chapter 16, pages 497-531, Palgrave Macmillan.
    12. Giuseppe Francesco Gori & Renato Paniccià, 2015. "A structural multisectoral model with new economic geography linkages for Tuscany," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 94, pages 175-196, November.
    13. J. Peter Neary, 2000. "Monopolistic Competition and International Trade Theory," Working Papers 200025, School of Economics, University College Dublin.
    14. Paolo Giordani & Luca Zamparelli, 2011. "On robust asymmetric equilibria in asymmetric R&D-driven growth economies," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 34(1), pages 67-84, May.
    15. Paul Krugman, 2009. "The Increasing Returns Revolution in Trade and Geography," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(3), pages 561-571, June.
    16. Annicchiarico, Barbara & Marvasi, Enrico, 2019. "Protection for sale under monopolistic competition: Beyond the CES," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    17. Jan Kranich, 2007. "Too much R&D? - Vertical differentiation in a model of monopolistic competition," Working Paper Series in Economics 59, University of Lüneburg, Institute of Economics.
    18. Hikaru Kawarazaki & Minhaj Mahmud & Yasuyuki Sawada & Mai Seki, 2023. "Haste Makes No Waste: Positive Peer Effects of Classroom Speed Competition on Learning," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 85(4), pages 755-772, August.
    19. Chang, Pao-Li, 2005. "Protection for sale under monopolistic competition," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 509-526, July.
    20. Olper, Alessandro, 2017. "The political economy of trade-related regulatory policy: environment and global value chain," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 5(3), February.
    21. Jang Ping Thia, 2008. "Why Capital does not Migrate to the South: A New Economic Geography Perspective," CEP Discussion Papers dp0895, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F01 - International Economics - - General - - - Global Outlook
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations

    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:nbr:nberwo:4465. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.