Search results

The primary purpose of this paper is to take an in-depth look at the question of whether liberalizing trade in agriculture can generate dynamic productivity gains comparable to those in the manufacturing sector.

In contrast to the manufacturing sector that has generated firm/plant-level trade data, there is a lack of farm-level trade data that are needed for empirical measurement of dynamic productivity gains. Therefore, the authors use thought experiments to analyze the sequence of events that would occur when trade is liberalized for agriculture; delineate the expected behaviors of the actors involved in the trade and draw inferences about whether there would be dynamic productivity gains from agricultural trade.

The central finding is that there would be little dynamic gain from agricultural trade at the farm level due to the limited role of producers in shaping their international competitiveness. Yet, agricultural trade may generate dynamic gains if states or input supply corporations respond to the freer trade environment by making more investments for research and development (R&D). Further, when intraindustry prevails, there can be productivity gains at the industry level due to the transfer of resources from less to more efficient farm producers.

The findings of the paper are expected to present insights into value for researchers working in the area of agricultural trade; for agricultural trade policymakers in developing countries and for trade negotiators engaged in reforming or designing World Trade Organization (WTO)’s trade rules for agriculture.

Most current modeling approaches identify very small gains from trade reform. In this chapter, we examine recent developments in the literature to assess whether standard modeling approaches are mis-specifying, understating, or overstating the gains from trade reform. Key areas where the impacts of trade barrier reduction appear to be understated include the measurement of barriers; the aggregation of these barriers; process productivity gains, particularly those resulting from reallocation of resources between firms; product quality improvements and expansion of product variety; factor supply; and investment of gains from trade.

Purpose − Instances of refusal to trade stand in contrast to the theorems on the gains from trade. Two paradigms, second-best and political economy, have been used to explain refusal to trade. Murray Kemp (1962) provided a foundation for the political economy paradigm when he noted that, in the absence of lump-sum redistribution, the theorems on the gains from trade are “true but irrelevant”. This chapter takes Murray Kemp's observation as a point of departure for a consideration of the relation between individual and group gains from trade. Paradigms in explaining refusal to trade are distinguished.

Methodology/Approach − This chapter examines ideas underlying explanations for refusal to participate in international trade.

Findings − Two different approaches are identified in modeling and explaining why the gains from trade are compromised by refusal of governments to allow free trade. The second-best approach suggests a justification for refusal to trade while the political economy approach with public-choice foundations proposes an explanation.

Practical implications − Ideology expressed in how governments are viewed can influence economic analysis.

The purpose of this study is to discuss the progress and challenges of South Asia in trade liberalization and facilitation, and to quantitatively demonstrate the potential benefits of trade facilitation in South Asia.

The quantitative study simulates the trade gains to the region based on the gravity model estimation for 101 world countries.

The gains to the region are estimated to be $31 billion in 2007 and $26 billion in 2010 if South Asia and the “rest of the world” raised levels of trade facilitation halfway to the world average. Of those trade gains, about 80 per cent (in 2007) and 67 per cent (in 2010) of the total gains to South Asia will be generated from South Asia's own efforts.

Thus this study demonstrates the importance of trade facilitation as an instrument for expansion of trade both within South Asia and with the rest of the world, as well as policy recommendations regarding the priority area for reform.

This article modifies a framework developed in industrial organisation analysis to identify the nature of the gains associated with pure intra‐industry exchange, and to isolate the factors which may influence their magnitude. The analysis suggests that since the magnitude of any gains is dependent on a number of variables no general statements can be made about the gains from intra‐industry exchange relative to inter‐industry exchange.

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.

The purpose of this chapter is to benchmark Tunisia against other emerging economies in terms of the regulatory barriers affecting particular services sectors and to assess the economy-wide effects of further liberalizing these services trade restrictions, compared with reducing the dispersion in barriers to its merchandise trade. On the basis of a rather restricted sample of services sectors, partial regulatory reform would yield gains roughly equivalent to full unilateral reform of manufacturing tariffs, but roughly one-tenth the gains from full bilateral reform of border protection in agriculture with the European Union. The adjustment costs associated with these services trade reforms would be minimal. The chapter identifies the reasons why the gains from these services reforms are relatively small and argues that a wider set of reforms could provide win-win outcomes and even fewer adjustment costs. By contrast, the gains in agriculture and manufacturing tend to come at the expense of domestic output in the reforming sectors – the gains are greater, but so too are the adjustment costs.

This chapter applies the new heterogeneous firm CGE model of Caliendo and Parro (2009) to determine what the Ricardian gains are from changing partners for members of a trade bloc. We focus on the MERCOSUR case, using a model with 48 sectors and 5 countries. Motivated by recent policy discussions, we quantify Uruguay's trade and welfare effects from signing a Free Trade Agreement with the United States and leaving MERCOSUR. We find positive welfare effects for Uruguay from bilaterally reducing tariffs with the United States. Most of the gains come from having access to lower-cost intermediate inputs for production. We then consider the policy experiment of bilaterally eliminating tariffs between all members of MERCOSUR and the United States. We find that Uruguay has the largest gains, while Argentina and Brazil do not benefit much. This chapter also illustrates how new models are a promising tool for the analysis of trade.

This article explores the value creation process from player sales in football to understand if the related capital gains correspond to significant increases in the stock value of selling companies. In addition, it aims to detect any potential drivers for higher (or slower) abnormal stock returns.

The authors analyze all the capital gains of the Italian and Portuguese listed football companies (the only ones for which, based on their annual reports, it was possible to trace the net book value for each player sold and, consequently, if any, the related capital gain) from 2012 to 2020 and use event study analysis to calculate the abnormal returns of the football companies' stocks. Moreover, the authors use a multiple linear regression model to identify the factors affecting investors' reactions and value creation process intensity.

The results show that, on average, the capital gains from player transfers in football are positive income components and produce statistically significant higher abnormal returns. In addition, the authors identified some relevant drivers related to their intensity which could guide the choices of corporate executives regarding future disposals of the multi-year performance rights of players in the roster.

This study considers only Italian and Portuguese football listed companies. It would be helpful to consider some of the companies from other countries which are also outstanding from the sports perspective, but, in practice, it was not possible due to the impossibility to trace the net book value of the single footballers sold in those clubs' public financial disclosure.

The value relevance of the capital gains from player trading activities should increase their importance, creating cascade effects on several activities generating value for football clubs (youth sector management, player scouting, technical improvement of the players). In addition, financial data show that the capital gains from player transfers are a basic income of European football clubs nowadays. Their executives consider these operations recurrent and continually search for more valuable transfers. Hence, it is reasonable to think that they (will) choose the players to sell considering both sports and financial aspects.

To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first study exploring the effects of capital gains from player trading activities on professional football clubs' stock value. The results obtained are even more relevant if one considers the importance these income components have in the profit formula of professional football clubs nowadays, also because of the negative repercussions caused by the recent COVID-19 pandemic.

Purpose – This chapter aims to examine trade patterns and gains from trade in a two-country general equilibrium model of increasing returns and oligopoly.

Approach – A general equilibrium model of increasing returns and oligopoly.

Findings – The determination of patterns of specialization and trade and gains from trade highly depends on the interaction between the degree of increasing returns and market power as well as the cross-country difference in factor endowments.

Originality – Unlike the existing literature, we endogenize the determination of specialization by using an allocation curve approach by Ethier (1982). To our knowledge, there is no comparable study that incorporates Ethier's (1982) approach to oligopolistic models of international trade.