Intra-European Trade of Manufacturing Goods: An Extension of the Gravity Model

Abstract

In this paper, we propose and test several extensions of the standard gravity model. This yields a specification that allows for (i) a more flexible income response; (ii) a competitiveness effect with a general and a specific component; and (iii) an alternative and consistent measure of remoteness. Those extensions were found to be significant factors to explain intra-EU trade. Next, we analyze the effect of EU harmonization of technical regulations on domestic and intra-EU trade. We find, at different levels of aggregation of the manufacturing sector, that harmonization of regulations has contributed to more intra-EU trade but, apparently, did not affect the so called border effect.

Keywords

• Trade, EU Countries, Gravity Equation, Border Effects

References

1. Anderson, J. (1979). A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation. American Economic Review, 69 (1), 106-16.
2. Anderson, J. and E. van Wincoop (2003). Gravity with Gravitas: a Solution to the Border Puzzle. American Economic Review, 93 (1), 170-92.
3. Armington, P. (1969). A Theory of Demand for Products distinguished by Place of Production. IMF Staff Paper no. 16.
4. Balassa, B. and L. Bauwens (1988). Changing Trade Patterns in Manufactured Goods: an Econometric Investigation. Amsterdam : North-Holland.
5. Banks, J., R. Blundell and A. Lewbel (1997). Quadratic Engle Curves and Consumer Demand. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 79 (4), 527-539.
6. Barten, A., G. d'Alcantara and G. Carrin (1976). COMET, a medium-term macroeconomic model for the European Economic Community. European Economic Review, 7, 63-115.
7. Bergstrand, J. (1985). The Gravity Equation in International Trade: Some Microeconomic Foundations and Empirical Evidence. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 67 (3), 474-81.
8. Bergstrand, J. (1989). The Generalized Gravity Equation, Monopolistic Competition, and the Factors-proportion Theory in International Trade. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 71 (3), 143-53.

9. Beck, N. and J. Katz (1995). What to do (and not to do) with time-series cross-section data. American Political Science Review, 89 (3), 634-47.
10. Buigues, P., F. Ilzkovitz and J. Lebrun (1990). The impact of the Internal Market by Industrial Sector: The Challenge for Member States. European Economy, Social Europe (special edition).
11. Brenton, P. and M. Vancauteren (2002). The extent of economic integration in Europe: Border effects, technical barriers to trade & home bias in consumption. Working Paper 157, Centre for European Policy Studies, Brussels.
12. Carlin, W., A. Glyn and J. van Reenen (1999). Export Performance of OECD Countries: An empirical Examination of the Role of Cost Competitiveness. Working paper 99/21, The Institute for Fiscal Studies.
13. Chen, N. (2004). Intra-national versus International Trade in the European Union: Why Do National Borders Matter? Journal of International Economics, 63 (1), 93-118.
14. Cheng, H. and H. Wall (1999). Controlling for Heterogeneity in Gravity Models of Trade. Working Paper no. 99-010A, the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
15. CEC, Commission of the European Communities (1996). NACE Rev. 1, Statistical Classification of Economic Activities in the European Communities. Official Journal of The European Union, L293.
16. CEC, Commission of the European Communities (1998). Technical Barriers to Trade. Volume 1 of Sub-series III Dismantling of Barriers of the Single Market Review. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publication.
17. Cook, D. and W. Sanford (1999). Applied Regression Including Computing and Graphics. Wiley.
18. Deardorff, A. (1995). Determinants of bilateral trade: does gravity work in a neoclassical world? Working Paper 5377, National Bureau of Economic Research, Washington DC.
19. Eaton, J. and S. Kortum (2002). Technology, Geography and Trade. Econometrica, 70 (5), 1741-79.
20. Egger, P. (2000). A note on the Proper Econometric Specification of the Gravity Equation. Economics Letters, 66 (1), 25-31.
21. Egger, P. (2001). An Econometric View on the Estimation of Gravity Potentials and the Calculation of Trade Potentials. Working Paper, Austrian Institute of Economic Research.
22. Frankel, J., E. Stein and S. Wei (1995). Trading Blocs and the Americas: The Natural, the Unnatural and the Super-Natural. Journal of Development Economics, 47 (1), 61-95.
23. Giavazzi, F. and M. Pagano (1988). The Advantages of Tying One‟s Hand: EMS discipline and Central Bank Credibility. European Economic Review, 32(5), 1055-1082.
24. Judge, G., W.E. Griffith, H. Lutkepol and T.S. Lee (1979). The theory and practice of Econometrics. Wiley Series in Probability and Mathematical Statistics.
25. Greene, W. (1997). Econometric Analysis. London: Prentice Hall.
26. Harrigan, J. (1993). OECD Imports and Trade Barriers. Journal of International Economics, 35(1/2), 95-111.
27. Head, K. and T. Mayer (2000). Non-Europe: The Magnitude and Causes of Market Fragmentation in the EU. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 136 (2), 285-314.
28. Helliwell, J. (1996). Do National Border Matter for Quebec‟s trade? Working paper 5215, National Bureau of Economic Research, Washington DC.
29. Helliwell, J. (1997). National Borders, Trade and Migration. Working paper 6027, National Bureau of Economic Research, Washington DC.
30. Helliwell, J. (1998). How Much do National Borders Matter. Washington D.C.: The Brookings Institution Press.
31. Helliwell, J. and G. Verdier (2001). Measuring Internal Trade Distances : a New Method applied to estimate Provincial Border Effects in Canada. Canadian Journal of Economics, 34 (4), 1024-41.
32. Helliwell, J. (2005). Border Effects: Assessing their Implications for Canadian Policy in a North American Context. In Social and Labour Market Aspects of North American Linkages, ed. Richard G. Harris and Thomas Lemieux. Calgary: University of Calgary Press, 41-76.
33. Helpman, E. and P. Krugman (1985). Market Structure and International Trade. Increasing Returns, Imperfect Competition and the International Economy. Cambridge M.A: MIT Press.
34. Leamer, E. (1997). Access to Western Markets and Eastern Effort Levels. In Lessons from the Economic Transition – Central and Eastern Europe in the 1990s, ed. Salvatore Zecchini. Kluwer Acedemic Publishers.
35. Mátyás, L. (1997). Proper Econometric Specification of the Gravity Model. The World Economy, 20, 363-68.
36. Mátyás, L. (1998). The Gravity Model: some econometric considerations. The World Economy, 20, 397-401.
37. McCallum, J. (1995). National Borders Matter: Canada-US Regional Trade Patterns. The American Economic Review, 85 (3), 615-23.
38. Moenius, J. (1999). Information versus Product Adaptation: the Role of Standards in Trade. Manuscript, Department of Economics, University of California (UCSD).
39. Nitsch, V. (2000). National Borders and international trade: evidence from the European Union. Canadian Journal of Economics, 33 (4), 1091-1105.
40. Pelkmans, J. (1987). The New approach to Technical Harmonization and Standardization. Market Journal of Common Studies, 25 (3), 249-269.
41. Pöyhonen, P. (1963). A Tentative Model for the Volume of Trade between Countries. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 90 (1), 93-99.
42. Sachs, J. and C. Wyplosz (1986). The Economic Consequences of President Mitterrand. Economic Policy, 2.
43. Tinbergen, J. (1962). Shaping the World Economy: Suggestions for and International Ecnomic Policy. New York: the Twentieth Century Fund.
44. Wei, S. (1996). Intranational versus International trade: How Stubborn are Nations in Global Integration? Working Paper 5531, National Bureau of Economic Research, Washington DC.
45. Wolf, H. (1997). Patterns of Intra-and Inter-State Trade. Working Paper 5939, National Bureau of Economic Research, Washington DC.
46. Wooldridge, J. (2002). Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. USA: MIT Press.