BazEkon - Biblioteka Główna Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie

BazEkon home page

Meny główne

Autor
Kurtović Safet (International University of Travnik, Bosnia and Herzegovina), Halili Blerim (University Union - Nikola Tesla, Belgrade, Serbia), Maxhuni Nehat (University Union - Nikola Tesla, Belgrade, Serbia)
Tytuł
Import Tariffs of Trading Partners : Evidence from Three West Balkan Countries
Taryfy importowe partnerów handlowych : doświadczenia trzech krajów Bałkanów Zachodnich
Źródło
Comparative Economic Research, 2017, vol. 20, nr 4, s. 83-100, rys., tab., bibliogr. 28 poz.
Słowa kluczowe
Taryfa celna, Eksport, Umowa handlowa
Customs tariff, Export, Trade agreement
Uwagi
Klasyfikacja JEL: F11, F14, F15
summ., streszcz.
Kraj/Region
Bałkany Zachodnie, Albania, Serbia, Macedonia
Western Balkan, Albania, Serbia, Macedonia
Abstrakt
Niniejszy artykuł ma na celu zbadanie wpływu obniżenia taryf importowych partnerów handlowych na eksport całkowity i eksport poszczególnych produktów z trzech państw Bałkanów Zachodnich łącznie oraz obserwowany indywidualnie dla każdego państwa. W celu zbadania potencjalnego efektu, w artykule wykorzystano równanie grawitacyjne i dokonano szacowania danych dynamicznych z użyciem systemu GMM. Badania dokonano w oparciu o podejście łączne i indywidualne. Podejście łączne do trzech krajów Bałkanów Zachodnich wskazało iż obniżenie średniej stawki celnej w imporcie (simple average tariff rate - SAT) i średniej ważonej stawki celnej (weighted average tariff - WAT) pozytywnie wpływa na wzrost eksportu całkowitego i eksportu poszczególnych produktów. Zastosowanie podejścia indywidualnego dla każdego kraju wykazało, że spadek stawek SAT i WAT w imporcie ma również pozytywny wpływ na wzrost eksportu całkowitego i eksportu poszczególnych produktów z Albanii i Serbii, podczas gdy efekt ten jest słaby dla byłej Jugosłowiańskiej Republiki Macedonii. (abstrakt oryginalny)

This paper aims to examine the effect of reducing the import tariffs of trading partners on total and individual exports of products from three countries of the Western Balkans and individually observed for each country. In order to investigate the potential effect, this paper applied the gravity equation and the GMM model system dynamic data estimation. The research is based on aggregate and non-aggregate approach. Within the aggregate approach for the three countries of the Western Balkans, the reduction of import simple average tariff rate (SAT) and weighted average tariff (WAT) rate have a positive effect on the growth of total and individual exports of products. Within the non-aggregate approach for each country individually, the reduction in imports of SAT and WAT rates also have a positive effect on the growth of total and individual exports of products from Albania and Serbia, while this effect is weak for FYR Macedonia. (original abstract)
Dostępne w
Biblioteka Główna Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Katowicach
Pełny tekst
Pokaż
Bibliografia
Pokaż
  1. Alfieri A., Channing A., Cirera X. (2007), Distortions to Agricultural Incentives in Mozambique, ʽAgricultural Distortions Working Paperʼ, 56040.
  2. Bagwell K., Staiger R.W. (2001), The WTO as a Mechanism for Securing Market Access Property Rights: Implications for Global Labor and Environmental Issues, ʽJournal of Economic Perspectivesʼ, 15(3). Available at http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/jep.15.3.69
  3. Bergstrand H.J. (1989), The generalized gravity equation, monopolistic competition, and the factor-proportions theory in international trade, ʽReview of Economics and Statisticsʼ, 71(1). Available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/24094706
  4. Blundell R., Bond S.R. (1998), GMM Estimation With Persistent Panel Data: An Application to Production Functions The Institute for Fiscal Studies, Working Paper Series No. W99/4.
  5. Brada C.J., Mendez J.A. (1983), Regional economic integration and the volume of intra-regional trade: A comparison of developed and developing country experience, Kyklos', 36(4).
  6. Brenton P., Manchin M. (2002), Making EU Trade Agreements Work: The Role of Rules of Origin, Working Papers 027.
  7. Bown P.C., Crowley M.A. (2016), The Empirical Landscape of Trade Policy, Cambridge Working Paper Economics 1624.
  8. Candau F., Fontagne L., Jean S. (2004), The utilisation rate of preferences in the EU, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.514.406&rep=rep1&type=pdf
  9. Candau F., Jean S. (2005), What Are EU Trade Preferences Worth for Sub-Saharan Africa and Other Developing Countries?, CEPII Working Paper No. 2005-19.
  10. Caporale G.M., Rault C., Sova R., Sova A. (2009), Trade Specialisation and Economic Convergence: Evidence from Two Eastern European Countries, Discussion Papers 875.
  11. Carkovic M., Levine R. (2002), Does Foreign Direct Investment Accelerate Economic Growth?, http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTFR/Resources/fdi.pdf
  12. Clausing A. K. (2001), Trade Creation and Trade Diversion in the Canada-United States Trade Agreement, ʽCanadian Journal of Economicsʼ, 34(3).
  13. Grossman M.G., Helpman E. (1995), The Politics of Free-Trade Agreements, ʽThe American Economic Reviewʼ, 85(4).
  14. Hansen J.D., Sala D. (2013), On the Equivalence of Tariffs and Quotas for Customs Unions, Discussion Papers on Business and Economics No. 11/2013.
  15. Hayakawa K., Yamashita N. (2011), The Role of Preferential Trade Agreements (PTAs) in Facilitating Global Production Networks, IDE Discussion Paper No. 280.
  16. Haveman D.J., Schatz H.J.(2003), Developed Country Trade Barriers and the Least Developed Countries: The Economic Result of Freeing Trade. Discussion Paper No. 2003/46.
  17. Frankel A.J., Stein E., Wei S-J. (1995), Trading blocs and the Americas: The natural, the unnatural, and the super-natural, ʽJournal of Development Economicsʼ, 47.
  18. Fleming J.M., Mundell R.A. (1964), Official Intervention on the Forward Exchange Market: A Simplified Analysis, ʽIMF Staff Papersʼ, 11(1).
  19. Korinek J., Bartos J. (2012), Multilateralising Regionalism: Disciplines on Export Restrictions in Regional Trade Agreements, ʽOECD Trade Policy Papersʼ, No. 139. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5k962hf7hfnr-en
  20. Lipsey G.R. (1957), The Theory of Customs Unions: Trade Diversion and Welfare, ʽEconomics, New Seriesʼ, 24(93).
  21. Manchin M. (2006), Preference Utilisation and Tariff Reduction in EU Imports from ACP Countries, ʽWorld Economyʼ, 29(9).
  22. Mansfield D.E., Milner H.V. (2015), The Domestic Politics of Preferential Trade Agreements in Hard Times. https://www.princeton.edu/~hmilner/working papers/Mansfield and Milner PTAhard times APSA 2015.pdf
  23. Medvedev D. (2006), Preferential Trade Agreements and Their Role in World Trade, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4038.
  24. Missios P., Saggi K., Yildiz H.M. (2016), External Trade Diversion, Exclusion Incentives and the Nature of Preferential Trade Agreements, ʽJournal of International Economicsʼ, No. 99. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2016.01.002
  25. Mukunoki H. (2005), Understanding the Effects of Preferential Trade Agreements: A Theoretical Overview, ʽBulletin of Gakushuin Universityʼ, No. 19.
  26. Nicita A. (2011), Measuring the Relative Strength of Preferential Market Access, ʽPolicy Issues in International Trade and Commodities Study Seriesʼ, No. 47. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, UNCTAD, Geneva.
  27. Nilsson L., Matsson N. (2009), Truths and myths about the openness of EU trade policy and the use of EU trade preferences, European Commission. Directorate-General for Trade. Brussels, Belgium. http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2009/july/tradoc_143993.pdf
  28. Richardson M. (1993), Endogenous protection and trade diversion, ʽJournal of International Economicsʼ, 34(3-4).
Cytowane przez
Pokaż
ISSN
1508-2008
Język
eng
URI / DOI
https://doi.org/10.1515/cer-2017-0029
Udostępnij na Facebooku Udostępnij na Twitterze Udostępnij na Google+ Udostępnij na Pinterest Udostępnij na LinkedIn Wyślij znajomemu