IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ssb/dispap/195.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Non-Tariff Barriers - the Achilles' Heel of Trade Policy Analyses

Author

Listed:

Abstract

This study demonstrates the quantitative, as well as the qualitative, role of non-tariff barriers (NTBs). The Norwegian nominal tariff and non-tariff barriers are identified and thoroughly quantified. Computations of effective rates of protection (ERP) show that NTBs entirely dominate tariffs as direct contributors to primary factor income, which again is an important determinant in allocation of resources among industries. The indirect input-output effects play a decisive role. This points to the importance of estimating the nominal trade barrier inputs properly; when a biased estimate is spread throughout the input-output system, not even the direction of the miscalculation will be easy to predict. In order to demonstrate the qualitative role, NTBs are categorised into price-oriented and quantity-oriented, respectively. ERP computations illustrate that the conclusions of policy analyses rely critically on the qualitative interdependency between quantity-oriented NTBs and other measures.

Suggested Citation

  • Taran Fæhn, 1997. "Non-Tariff Barriers - the Achilles' Heel of Trade Policy Analyses," Discussion Papers 195, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    • Handle: RePEc:ssb:dispap:195
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ssb.no/a/publikasjoner/pdf/DP/dp195.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Deardoff, A.V. & Brown, D.K. & Stern, R.M. & Fox, A.K., 1995. "Computational Analysis of Goods and Services Liberalization in the Uruguay Round," Working Papers 379, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    2. D. Greenaway & R. Hine, 1993. "Trade policy and protection in the European Community," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 4(4), pages 433-456, December.
    3. Roland-Holst, David W & Polo, Clemente & Sancho, Ferran, 1995. "Trade Liberalization and Industrial Structure in Spain: An Applied General Equilibrium Analysis," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 1-18.
    4. Smith, Alasdair & Venables, Anthony J., 1988. "Completing the internal market in the European Community : Some industry simulations," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1501-1525, September.
    5. Sam Laird & Alexander Yeats, 1990. "Quantitative Methods for Trade-Barrier Analysis," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-349-11141-1, December.
    6. repec:bla:econom:v:36:y:1969:i:142:p:119-38 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Haaland, Jan I., 1994. "The Uruguay Round and Trade in Manufactures and Services. General Equilibrium Simulations of Production, Trade and Welfare Effects of Liberalization," CEPR Discussion Papers 1008, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Vernon Roningen & Alexander Yeats, 1976. "Nontariff distortions of international trade: Some preliminary empirical evidence," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 112(4), pages 613-625, December.
    9. Gabrielle Antille & Marc Bacchetta & Fabrizio Carlevaro & Tobias Müller & Nicolas Schmitt, 1993. "Switzerland and the European Economic Area: A General Equilibrium Assessment of Some Measures of Integration," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 129(IV), pages 643-672, 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. Taran Fæhn, 2002. "The Qualitative and Quantitative Significance of Non-Tariff Barriers: An ERP study of Norway," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 35-57.
    2. Warwick Mckibbin & Dominick Salvatore, 1995. "The global economic consequences of the Uruguay Round," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 111-129, April.
    3. Elbehri, Aziz & Hertel, Thomas, 2006. "A Comparative Analysis of the EU-Morocco FTA vs. Multilateral Liberalization," Journal of Economic Integration, Center for Economic Integration, Sejong University, vol. 21, pages 496-525.
    4. Harald Badinger & Fritz Breuss, 2011. "The Quantitative Effects of European Post-war Economic Integration," Chapters, in: Miroslav N. Jovanović (ed.), International Handbook on the Economics of Integration, Volume III, chapter 14, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Scott Bradford, 2000. "Rents, Votes, and Protection: Explaining the Structure of Trade Barriers Across Industries," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 1717, Econometric Society.
    6. Anthony Venables, 1994. "Trade Policy under Imperfect Competition: A Numerical Assessment," NBER Chapters, in: Empirical Studies of Strategic Trade Policy, pages 41-66, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. De Bonis, Valeria, 1997. "Regional integration and factor income taxation," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1849, The World Bank.
    8. Jaime de Melo & David Tarr, 2015. "VERs under imperfect competition and foreign direct investment: A case study of the US–Japan auto VER," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Modeling Developing Countries' Policies in General Equilibrium, chapter 22, pages 461-483, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    9. Lucian Cernat & Sam Laird & Luca Monge-Roffarello & Alessandro Turrini, 2003. "The EU's Everything But Arms Initiative and the Least-developed Countries," WIDER Working Paper Series DP2003-47, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    10. Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M. Stern, 2004. "EU Expansion and EU Growth," International Economic Association Series, in: Alan V. Deardorff (ed.), The Past, Present and Future of the European Union, chapter 5, pages 74-102, Palgrave Macmillan.
    11. Jota Ishikawa & Eiji Horiuchi, 2012. "Strategic Foreign Direct Investment in Vertically Related Markets," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 88(281), pages 229-242, June.
    12. Razin, Assaf & Sadka, Efraim & Coury, Tarek, 2003. "Trade openness, investment instability and terms-of-trade volatility," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 285-306, December.
    13. Arjan Lejour & Vladimir Solanic & Paul Tang, 2009. "EU Accession and Income Growth: An Empirical Approach," Transition Studies Review, Springer;Central Eastern European University Network (CEEUN), vol. 16(1), pages 127-144, May.
    14. Lord, Montague, 2000. "Viet Nam: Small Scale Technical assistance for Capacity Building of Ministry of Finance to Support Tariff, Industry and Subsidy Analysis for the WTO Accession," MPRA Paper 41158, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Hughes Hallett,Andrew J., 1992. "The impact of EC-92 on developing countries'trade : a dissenting view," Policy Research Working Paper Series 885, The World Bank.
    16. Nielsen, Chantal Pohl & Yu, Wusheng, 2002. "Integration of the International Rice Market: Implications for Trade Liberalization," Conference papers 330992, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    17. Anderson, Simon P. & Schmitt, Nicolas & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 1995. "Who benefits from antidumping legislation?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3-4), pages 321-337, May.
    18. Bouzahzah, Mohamed & Esmaeili, Hamid & Ihadiyan, Abid, 2007. "Ouverture commerciale et migration," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 83(1), pages 71-90, mars.
    19. Gregory Corcos & Massimo Del Gatto & Giordano Mion & Gianmarco I.P. Ottaviano, 2012. "Productivity and Firm Selection: Quantifying the ‘New’ Gains from Trade," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 122(561), pages 754-798, June.
    20. Baldwin, Richard E. & Forslid, Rikard, 2000. "Trade liberalisation and endogenous growth: A q-theory approach," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 497-517, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Non-tariff barriers; Trade policy; ERP computations.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C80 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - General
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • L60 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - General
    • L70 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Primary Products and Construction - - - General

    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:ssb:dispap:195. 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: L Maasø (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ssbgvno.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.