IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/5574.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Strategic Export Subsidies and Reciprocal Trade Agreements: The Natural Monopoly Case

Author

Listed:
  • Kyle Bagwell
  • Robert W. Staiger

Abstract

Why do governments seek restrictions on the use of export subsidies through reciprocal trade agreements such as GATT? With existing arguments, it is possible to understand GATT's restrictions on export subsidies as representing an inefficient victory of the interests of exporting governments over the interests of importing governments. However, to our knowledge, there does not exist a formal theoretical treatment that provides circumstances under which GATT's restrictions on export subsidies can be given a world-wide efficiency rationale. In this paper, we offer one such treatment in the context of a natural monopoly market. We emphasize that subsidy competition between governments can serve to coordinate the entry decisions of firms, finding that consumers in the importing countries may suffer if the coordination afforded exporters by government subsidy programs does more to prevent entry than to promote it. In such circumstances, we show that the existence of export subsidy programs can lead to inefficiencies, and importing countries and the world as a whole can be better off when such programs are banned.

Suggested Citation

  • Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 1996. "Strategic Export Subsidies and Reciprocal Trade Agreements: The Natural Monopoly Case," NBER Working Papers 5574, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:5574
    Note: ITI
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w5574.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bagwell, K. & Staiger, R.W., 1996. "Reciprocal Trade Liberalization," Working papers 9602, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
    2. Varian, Hal R, 1980. "A Model of Sales," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(4), pages 651-659, September.
    3. Bagwell, Kyle & Staiger, Robert W, 1992. "The Sensitivity of Strategic and Corrective R&D Policy in Battles for Monopoly," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 33(4), pages 795-816, November.
    4. Barbara J. Spencer & James A. Brander, 1983. "International R & D Rivalry and Industrial Strategy," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 50(4), pages 707-722.
    5. Jonathan Eaton & Gene M. Grossman, 1986. "Optimal Trade and Industrial Policy Under Oligopoly," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(2), pages 383-406.
    6. Kyle Bagwell & Garey Ramey, 1994. "Advertising and Coordination," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 61(1), pages 153-171.
    7. Bagwell, Kyle & Ramey, Garey, 1994. "Coordination Economies, Advertising, and Search Behavior in Retail Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(3), pages 498-517, June.
    8. Brander, James A. & Spencer, Barbara J., 1985. "Export subsidies and international market share rivalry," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1-2), pages 83-100, February.
    9. Dixit, Avinash K & Kyle, Albert S, 1985. "The Use of Protection and Subsidies for Entry Promotion and Deterrence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(1), pages 139-152, March.
    10. Maggi, Giovanni, 1996. "Strategic Trade Policies with Endogenous Mode of Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(1), pages 237-258, March.
    11. repec:hoo:wpaper:e-92-1 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Desai, Mihir A. & Hines Jr., James R., 2008. "Market reactions to export subsidies," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 459-474, March.
    2. Jost, Peter-J. & van der Velden, Claus, 2008. "Organizational design of R&D after mergers and the role of budget responsibility," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 60(5), pages 469-484.
    3. Yu-Ter Wang, 2003. "Export Subsidy Competition And The Wto Agreement," Journal of Economic Development, Chung-Ang Unviersity, Department of Economics, vol. 28(1), pages 23-34, June.
    4. Jost, Peter-J., 2011. "Joint ventures in patent contests with spillovers and the role of strategic budgeting," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 63(6), pages 605-637.
    5. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2001. "Strategic Trade, Competitive Industries and Agricultural Trade Disputes," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(2), pages 113-128, July.
    6. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2004. "Subsidy Agreements," NBER Working Papers 10292, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. David Collie, 2000. "A Rationale for the WTO Prohibition of Export Subsidies: Strategic Export Subsidies and World Welfare," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 229-245, July.
    8. Conconi, Paola, 2000. "Trade Bloc Formation Under Imperfect Competition," Economic Research Papers 269342, University of Warwick - Department of Economics.
    9. Konrad, Kai A., 2000. "Trade contests," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 317-334, August.
    10. Steffen Huck & Kai A. Konrad & Wieland Müller, 2002. "Merger and Collusion in Contests," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 158(4), pages 563-575, December.
    11. Uwe Dulleck, 2005. "WTO's Anti-dumping Rule and the Protection of Incumbents," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 229-239.
    12. Uwe Dulleck, 2005. "WTO's Anti-dumping Rule and the Protection of Incumbents," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 229-239.
    13. Steffen Huck & Kai A. Konrad & Wieland Müller, 2000. "Merger in Contests," CESifo Working Paper Series 241, CESifo.
      • Huck, Steffen & Konrad, Kai A. & Müller, Wieland, 2000. "Merger in contests," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 2000,3, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
    14. Bagwell, Kyle & Staiger, Robert W., 2001. "Reciprocity, non-discrimination and preferential agreements in the multilateral trading system," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 281-325, June.

    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. Dermot Leahy & J. Peter Neary, 2013. "Oligopoly and Trade," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Daniel Bernhofen & Rod Falvey & David Greenaway & Udo Kreickemeier (ed.), Palgrave Handbook of International Trade, chapter 7, pages 197-235, Palgrave Macmillan.
    2. Brander, James A., 1995. "Strategic trade policy," Handbook of International Economics, in: G. M. Grossman & K. Rogoff (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 27, pages 1395-1455, Elsevier.
    3. Yoon, Jeong & Choi, Kangsik, 2018. "Why do export subsidies still exist? R&D and output subsidies," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 30-38.
    4. Neary, J Peter & Leahy, Dermot, 2000. "Strategic Trade and Industrial Policy towards Dynamic Oligopolies," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 484-508, April.
    5. Choi, Kangsik & Lee, Ki-Dong & Lim, Seonyoung, 2016. "Strategic Trade Policies In International Rivalry When Competition Mode Is Endogenous," Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 57(2), pages 223-241, December.
    6. Krugman, Paul R., 1989. "Industrial organization and international trade," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 20, pages 1179-1223, Elsevier.
    7. Hoefele, Andreas, 2016. "Endogenous product differentiation and international R&D policy," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 335-346.
    8. Carolyn Fischer, 2016. "Strategic Subsidies for Green Goods," Working Papers 2016.30, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    9. Christos Constantatos & Eleftherios Filippiadis & Eftichios Sartzetakis, 2014. "Using the allocation of emission permits for strategic trade purposes," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 259-280, June.
    10. Lars Calmfors & Giancarlo Corsetti & Michael P. Devereux & Gilles Saint-Paul & Hans-Werner Sinn & Jan-Egbert Sturm & Xavier Vives, 2008. "Chapter 4: Industrial policy," EEAG Report on the European Economy, CESifo, vol. 0, pages 105-124, February.
    11. Miyagiwa, Kaz & Ohno, Yuka, 1997. "Strategic R&D policy and appropriability," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 125-148, February.
    12. Reimer, Jeffrey J. & Stiegert, Kyle W., 2006. "Evidence on Imperfect Competition and Strategic Trade Theory," Staff Papers 12609, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    13. Keith Head & Barbara J. Spencer, 2017. "Oligopoly in international trade: Rise, fall and resurgence," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(5), pages 1414-1444, December.
    14. Konrad, Kai A., 2000. "Trade contests," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 317-334, August.
    15. Kresimir Zigic, 2011. "Strategic Interactions in Markets with Innovative Activity: The Cases of Strategic Trade Policy and Market Leadership," CERGE-EI Books, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague, edition 1, number b06, May.
    16. Lim, Seonyoung & Choi, Kangsik, 2014. "Strategic Subsidy Policies with Endogenous Choice of Competition Mode," MPRA Paper 59462, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Dermot Leahy & J. Peter Neary, 2001. "Robust rules for industrial policy open economies," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 393-409.
    18. Naoto Jinji & Tsuyoshi Toshimitsu, 2010. "Strategic R&D Policy in a Quality-Differentiated Industry with More than Two Exporting Countries," Discussion papers e-09-001, Graduate School of Economics Project Center, Kyoto University.
    19. Praveen Kujal & Juan Ruiz, 2003. "International Trade Policy towards Monopolies and Oligopolies," International Trade 0302002, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 24 Mar 2003.
    20. Dewit, Gerda & Leahy, Dermot, 2004. "Rivalry in uncertain export markets: commitment versus flexibility," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 195-209, October.

    More about this item

    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

    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:5574. 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.