Are Matched Partner Trade Statistics a Usable Measure of Transportation Costs?*

Abstract

Data on transportation costs are difficult to obtain. In the absence of good data, many researchers have turned to indirect measures of transportation costs constructed using matched partner c.i.f./f.o.b. ratios from IMF and UN data. We investigate whether these data are usable, by comparing their levels and variation to directly measured transport costs for the US and New Zealand. We find that IMF c.i.f./f.o.b. ratios are badly error-ridden in levels, and contain no useful information for time-series or cross-commodity variation. However, the IMF data do appear to reveal some meaningful cross-exporter variation that might be usefully exploited by researchers. . We thank Russell Hillberry for helpful comments.

China's capital flight: Pre- and post-crisis experiences

“…Note that both (14) and (15) allow CIF to vary over time and across countries (Hummels and Lugovskyy, 2006).…”

Product differentiation and duration of US import trade

“…15 Suppliers capable of large deliveries may be less prone to disruption and if such capability is correlated with country characteristics we need to include country fixed effects.…”

A Search Cost Perspective on Duration of Trade

“…GDP of the supplier country is included to control for this effect. 9 To control for cost differences and changes in costs across suppliers percentage change in the relative real exchange rate and ad-valorem transportation costs are used. The change in the relative real exchange rate is constructed by first defining each country's exchange rate so an increase corresponds to a real depreciation.…”