IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sec/cnstan/0286.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

New Member States' Trading Potential Following EMU Accession: A Gravity Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Maryla Maliszewska

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to look at implications of the EMU accession on international trade flows of the new member states with members of the enlarged EU. I begin with the evaluation of an early impact of the EMU on trade based on a gravity model. The results are then employed in the calculation of potential levels of trade of the Central and East European countries. The results show a high degree of trade integration between most of the new member states and the EU except for Latvia, Lithuania and Poland. In trade among the new member states, potential trade flows by far exceed actual levels for all countries except the Czech Republic and Slovakia.

Suggested Citation

  • Maryla Maliszewska, 2004. "New Member States' Trading Potential Following EMU Accession: A Gravity Approach," CASE Network Studies and Analyses 0286, CASE-Center for Social and Economic Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:sec:cnstan:0286
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://case-research.eu/upload/publikacja_plik/3565756_286ok2.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alejandro Micco & Ernesto Stein & Guillermo Ordoñez, 2003. "The currency union effect on trade: early evidence from EMU [‘A theoretical foundation for the gravity equation’]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 18(37), pages 315-356.
    2. Parsley, David C. & Wei, Shang-Jin, 2001. "Explaining the border effect: the role of exchange rate variability, shipping costs, and geography," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 87-105, October.
    3. Francisco Alcalá & Antonio Ciccone, 2004. "Trade and Productivity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(2), pages 613-646.
    4. Antoni Estevadeordal & Brian Frantz & Alan M. Taylor, 2003. "The Rise and Fall of World Trade, 1870–1939," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(2), pages 359-407.
    5. Alan V. Deardorff, 2011. "Determinants of Bilateral Trade: Does Gravity Work in a Neoclassical World?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Robert M Stern (ed.), Comparative Advantage, Growth, And The Gains From Trade And Globalization A Festschrift in Honor of Alan V Deardorff, chapter 24, pages 267-293, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Christopher M. Meissner, 2003. "Exchange-Rate Regimes and International Trade: Evidence from the Classical Gold Standard Era," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 344-353, March.
    7. Simon J. Evenett & Wolfgang Keller, 2002. "On Theories Explaining the Success of the Gravity Equation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(2), pages 281-316, April.
    8. Gros, Daniel & Gonciarz, Andrzej, 1996. "A note on the trade potential of Central and Eastern Europe," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 709-721, December.
    9. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2003. "Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to the Border Puzzle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 170-192, March.
    10. Nilsson, Lars, 2000. "Trade integration and the EU economic membership criteria," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 807-827, November.
    11. Alejandro Micco & Ernesto H. Stein & Guillermo Luis Ordoñez, 2003. "The Currency Union Effect on Trade: Early Evidence from EMU," Research Department Publications 4339, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.
    12. Arjan Lejour & Ruud de Mooij & Richard Nahuis, 2001. "EU enlargement: economic implications for countries and industries," CPB Document 11, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    13. Andrew K. Rose, 2000. "One money, one market: the effect of common currencies on trade," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 15(30), pages 08-45.
    14. McCallum, John, 1995. "National Borders Matter: Canada-U.S. Regional Trade Patterns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(3), pages 615-623, June.
    15. Deardoff, A.V., 1995. "Determinants of Bilateral Trade: Does Gravity Work in a Neoclassical World?," Working Papers 382, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    16. repec:fth:michin:382 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. David Barr & Francis Breedon & David Miles, 2003. "Life on the outside: economic conditions and prospects outside euroland [‘Do domestic firms benefit from foreign direct investment? Evidence from Venezuela’]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 18(37), pages 573-613.
    18. Andrew K. Rose & Eric van Wincoop, 2001. "National Money as a Barrier to International Trade: The Real Case for Currency Union," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(2), pages 386-390, May.
    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. Iwona Maciejczyk-Bujnowicz, 2016. "Foreign trade and the theory of optimum currency areas. Implications for Poland," International Economics, University of Lodz, Faculty of Economics and Sociology, issue 13, pages 5-26, March.
    2. Andrzej Cieslik & Jan Michalek & Anna Michalek, 2013. "The Impact Of The Common Currency On Exports Of New Emu Members: Firm-Level Evidence For Slovenia And Slovakia," Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 8(4), pages 7-23, December.
    3. Ansgar Belke & Julia Spies, 2008. "Enlarging the EMU to the east: what effects on trade?," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 35(4), pages 369-389, September.
    4. Andrew K. Rose, 2017. "Why do Estimates of the EMU Effect on Trade Vary so Much?," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 1-18, February.
    5. Natalia Drzewoszewska, 2014. "Searching for the Appropriate Measure of Multilateral Trade-Resistance Terms in the Gravity Model of Bilateral Trade Flows," Dynamic Econometric Models, Uniwersytet Mikolaja Kopernika, vol. 14, pages 29-49.
    6. Andrzej Cieślik & Jan Jakub Michałek & Jerzy Mycielski, 2012. "Measuring the trade effects of the euro in Central and Eastern Europe," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 25-49, November.
    7. repec:wsr:wpaper:y:2017:i:179 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Daras, Tomasz & Hagemejer, Jan, 2008. "The long run-effects of the Poland's accession to the eurozone. Simulation using POLDYN - a dynamic computable general equilibrium model," MPRA Paper 15760, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Cieślik Andrzej & Michałek Jan & Michałek Anna, 2014. "Does the Common Currency Increase Exports? Evidence from Firm-Level Data," International Journal of Management and Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, vol. 41(1), pages 8-22, March.
    10. Isaac Mensah, 2019. "The euro's effect on trade: an analysis of "old" and "new" EMU members," Review of Economics and Institutions, Università di Perugia, vol. 10(1).

    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. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2004. "Trade Costs," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(3), pages 691-751, September.
    2. Sergio de Nardis & Roberta De Santis & Claudio Vicarelli, 2008. "The Euro's Effects on Trade in a Dynamic Setting," European Journal of Comparative Economics, Cattaneo University (LIUC), vol. 5(1), pages 73-85, June.
    3. Baldwin, Richard & Taglioni, Daria, 2006. "Gravity for Dummies and Dummies for Gravity Equations," CEPR Discussion Papers 5850, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Michele Fratianni & Francesco Marchionne, 2011. "The Limits to Integration," Chapters, in: Miroslav N. Jovanović (ed.), International Handbook on the Economics of Integration, Volume I, chapter 9, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Cardamone, Paola, 2007. "A Survey of the Assessments of the Effectiveness of Preferential Trade Agreements using Gravity Models," Economia Internazionale / International Economics, Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato Agricoltura di Genova, vol. 60(4), pages 421-473.
    6. Salvador Gil-Pareja & Rafael Llorca-Vivero & Jose Martinez-Serrano, 2006. "The border effect in Spain: The Basque Country case," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(4), pages 335-345.
    7. Theo S. Eicher & Christian Henn, 2011. "One Money, One Market: A Revised Benchmark," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(3), pages 419-435, August.
    8. Baldwin, Richard E. & Skudelny, Frauke & Taglioni, Daria, 2005. "Trade effects of the euro: evidence from sectoral data," Working Paper Series 446, European Central Bank.
    9. Gil-Pareja, Salvador & Llorca-Vivero, Rafael & Martínez-Serrano, José Antonio, 2008. "Trade effects of monetary agreements: Evidence for OECD countries," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 733-755, May.
    10. Klein, Michael W. & Shambaugh, Jay C., 2006. "Fixed exchange rates and trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 359-383, December.
    11. Matthieu Bussière & Bernd Schnatz, 2009. "Evaluating China’s Integration in World Trade with a Gravity Model Based Benchmark," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 85-111, February.
    12. Sierra-Fernández, Mª Del Pilar & Martínez-Campillo, Almudena, 2009. "Impacto del proceso de integración europea sobre las exportaciones de Castilla y León (1993-2007): un análisis econométrico a partir de la ecuación de gravedad/The Impact of the European Integration P," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 27, pages 783(34á)-78, Diciembre.
    13. Alejandro Micco & Ernesto H. Stein & Guillermo Luis Ordoñez, 2003. "Efectos de la unión monetaria sobre el comercio internacional: elementos de juicio iniciales de la Unión Monetaria Europea," Research Department Publications 4340, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.
    14. Alejandro Micco & Ernesto Stein & Guillermo Ordoñez, 2003. "The currency union effect on trade: early evidence from EMU [‘A theoretical foundation for the gravity equation’]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 18(37), pages 315-356.
    15. Francis Breedon & Thórarinn G. Pétursson, 2004. "Out in the cold? Iceland’s trade performance outside the EU," Economics wp26_thorarinn, Department of Economics, Central bank of Iceland.
    16. Luca De Benedictis & Roberta De Santis & Claudio Vicarelli, 2005. "Hub-and-Spoke or else? Free trade agreements in the 'enlarged' European Union," European Journal of Comparative Economics, Cattaneo University (LIUC), vol. 2(2), pages 245-260, December.
    17. Tomáš Havránek, 2010. "Rose effect and the euro: is the magic gone?," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 146(2), pages 241-261, June.
    18. Kris James Mitchener & Marc Weidenmier, 2008. "Trade and Empire," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(533), pages 1805-1834, November.
    19. Wong, Kin-Ming & Chong, Terence Tai-Leung, 2016. "Does monetary policy matter for trade?," International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 107-125.
    20. Vicarelli, Claudio & De Santis, Roberta & De Nardis, Sergio, 2008. "The Single Currency's Effects on Eurozone Sectoral Trade: Winners and Losers?," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 2, pages 1-34.

    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:sec:cnstan:0286. 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: Anna Budzynska (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/caseepl.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.