Taryfy importowe partnerów handlowych: doświadczenia trzech krajów Bałkanów Zachodnich

Safet Kurtović; Blerim Halili; Nehat Maxhuni

doi:10.1515/cer-2017-0029

Authors

Safet Kurtović University of Travnik in Travnik, Faculty of Management and Business Economics, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Blerim Halili University Union – Nikola Tesla in Belgrade, Faculty of Engineering Management, Serbia
Nehat Maxhuni University Union – Nikola Tesla in Belgrade, Faculty of Engineering Management, Serbia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1515/cer-2017-0029

Keywords:

tariffs, exports, products, preferential tariffs, trade agreements

Abstract

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.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Alfieri A., Channing A., Cirera X. (2007), Distortions to Agricultural Incentives in Mozambique, ʽAgricultural Distortions Working Paperʼ, 56040.
Google Scholar

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
Google Scholar

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
Google Scholar

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.
Google Scholar

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).
Google Scholar

Brenton P., Manchin M. (2002), Making EU Trade Agreements Work: The Role of Rules of Origin, Working Papers 027.
Google Scholar

Bown P.C., Crowley M.A. (2016), The Empirical Landscape of Trade Policy, Cambridge Working Paper Economics 1624.
Google Scholar

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
Google Scholar

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.
Google Scholar

Caporale G.M., Rault C., Sova R., Sova A. (2009), Trade Specialisation and Economic Convergence: Evidence from Two Eastern European Countries, Discussion Papers 875.
Google Scholar

Carkovic M., Levine R. (2002), Does Foreign Direct Investment Accelerate Economic Growth?, http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTFR/Resources/fdi.pdf
Google Scholar

Clausing A. K. (2001), Trade Creation and Trade Diversion in the Canada–United States Trade Agreement, ʽCanadian Journal of Economicsʼ, 34(3).
Google Scholar

Grossman M.G., Helpman E. (1995), The Politics of Free‑Trade Agreements, ʽThe American Eco- nomic Reviewʼ, 85(4).
Google Scholar

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.
Google Scholar

Hayakawa K., Yamashita N. (2011), The Role of Preferential Trade Agreements (PTAs) in Facilitating Global Production Networks, IDE Discussion Paper No. 280.
Google Scholar

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.
Google Scholar

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.
Google Scholar

Fleming J.M., Mundell R.A. (1964), Official Intervention on the Forward Exchange Market: A Simplified Analysis, ʽIMF Staff Papersʼ, 11(1).
Google Scholar

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
Google Scholar

Lipsey G.R. (1957), The Theory of Customs Unions: Trade Diversion and Welfare, ʽEconomics, New Seriesʼ, 24(93).
Google Scholar

Manchin M. (2006), Preference Utilisation and Tariff Reduction in EU Imports from ACP Countries, ʽWorld Economyʼ, 29(9).
Google Scholar

Mansfield D.E., Milner H.V. (2015), The Domestic Politics of Preferential Trade Agreements in Hard Times. https://www.princeton.edu/~hmilner/working%20papers/Mansfield%20and%20Milner%20PTAhard%20times%20APSA%202015.pdf
Google Scholar

Medvedev D. (2006), Preferential Trade Agreements and Their Role in World Trade, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4038.
Google Scholar

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
Google Scholar

Mukunoki H. (2005), Understanding the Effects of Preferential Trade Agreements: A Theoretical Overview, ʽBulletin of Gakushuin Universityʼ, No. 19.
Google Scholar

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.
Google Scholar

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
Google Scholar

Richardson M. (1993), Endogenous protection and trade diversion, ʽJournal of International Economicsʼ, 34(3–4).
Google Scholar