European Enlargement and Single Market Accession: A Mistreated Issue

Philippidis, George; Carrington, Anca

doi:10.11130/jei.2005.20.3.543

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To the best of our knowledge, there are three studies examining regional trade and welfare implications of NTBs in the context of EU enlargement. These are Lejour et al (2001); Nahuis (2004) and Philippidis and Carrington (2005); (yet, the latter basically replicates the Lejour et al (2001), using spatial econometric procedures). Lejour et al (2001) used the WorldScan model, which is a CGE model for the world economy.…”

Section: Gravity Model Approachmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…However, the gravity specification employed in Lejour et al (2001) was recently criticized and revisited by Philippidis and Carrington (2005). The authors claim that the impact of single market access is misrepresented due to the absence of spatial effects in their gravity specification.…”

Section: Gravity Model Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The authors claim that the impact of single market access is misrepresented due to the absence of spatial effects in their gravity specification. Philippidis and Carrington (2005) employed spatial econometrics procedures in gravity modeling and applied the same CGE dataset and aggregation as Lejour et al (2001) to ascertain the degree of bias on gravity estimates of predicted trade. Authors explain that, in the presence of spatial effects (namely spatial dependence, caused by various degrees of spatial aggregation, spatial externalities and spillover effects, and the spatial structure of heteroskedasticity), traditional econometric techniques produce inefficient and, given the implicit misspecification, biased estimates.…”

Section: Gravity Model Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Institutional Harmonization in the Context of Relations between the EU and Its Eastern Neighbours: Costs and Benefits and Methodologies of Their Measurement

Kolesnichenko

Dimitrov²,

Dubrovskiy³

et al. 2009

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. The CASE Network is a group of economic and social research centers in Poland, Kyrgyzstan, Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, and Belarus. Organizations in the network regularly conduct joint research and advisory projects. The research covers a wide spectrum of economic and social issues, including economic effects of the European integration process, economic relations between the EU and CIS, monetary policy and euro-accession, innovation and competitiveness, and labour markets and social policy. The network aims to increase the range and quality of economic research and information available to policy-makers and civil society, and takes an active role in on-going debates on how to meet the economic challenges facing the EU, post-transition countries and the global economy. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor mayThe CASE network consists of: AbstractThis paper studies costs and benefits of institutional harmonisation in the context of EU relations with its neighbors. The purpose of this paper is to outline the likely forms of institutional harmonisation between the EU and its Eastern neighbors and provide an overview of the methodologies that can be used in measuring its effects (costs and benefits). This paper serves as a background for two measurement exercises -one on benefits and another on costs -that are to be undertaken during the second stage of research. INSTITUTIONAL HARMONIZATION IN THE CONTEXT... CASE Reports No. 75/2007The Authors Veliko Dimitrov is a senior economist at the Institute for Market Economics (IME), Bulgaria. He has worked at IME as a research economist since May 2005, and as a senior economist since January 2007. Veliko studied International Economic Relations at the University of National and World Economics, Sofia and has taken several courses at Friedrich Ludwig University, Freiburg, Germany. He has experience in project management, economic research in various areas, occasional lecturing and participation in public policy TV and radio debates. He is a regular columnist in several major Bulgarian newspapers and periodical bulletins published by IME. His main spheres of specialization include the improvement of the national legislation process, labour market reform, reduction of administrative burdens, deregulation of economic activity, telecommunications sector regulation, and cost-benefit analysis.Vladimir Dubrovskiy is senior economist and member of the supervisory board of CASE Ukraine. Mr. Dubrovskiy specializes in the issues...

show abstract

Section: Gravity Model Approachmentioning

confidence: 77%

Section: Gravity Model Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Gravity Model Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Institutional Harmonization in the Context of Relations between the EU and Its Eastern Neighbours: Costs and Benefits and Methodologies of Their Measurement

Kolesnichenko

Dimitrov²,

Dubrovskiy³

et al. 2009

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…financial services, construction, trade services, communication etc. ), there is significant evidence (Francois and Hoekman, 1999; Hoekman, 1995; Kume et al, 2001; and Park, 2002) of NTB trade costs, whilst other studies (Lejour et al, 2004; and Philippidis and Carrington, 2005) identify European NTB trade costs across a range of product categories, particularly in agro‐food sectors.…”

Section: Cge Modelling and Mercosur Tradementioning

confidence: 99%

An Analysis of Mercosur's Regional Trading Arrangements

Philippidis

Sanjuán

2007

World Economy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After six years of stop-start negotiations, Mercosur is no closer to signing a regional trading agreement (RTA) with the EU, whilst negotiations to finalise a Free Trade of the Americas Agreement (FTAA) have also stalled. This is due to various factors: economic crises in Mercosur, intransigence by member countries and uncertainty surrounding the outcome of the Doha Round. Estimates from the trade literature predict welfare gains to Mercosur from both RTAs whilst only one study assesses the additional benefits of removing non-tariff barrier (NTB) trade costs which have remained largely unchallenged within the multilateral forum. Copyright 2007 The Authors Journal compilation 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd .

show abstract