Rising Protectionism and Global Value Chains: Quantifying the General Equilibrium Effects

Cappariello, Rita; Franco-Bedoya, Sebastian; Gunnella, Vanessa; Ottaviano, Gianmarco I.P.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3517293

Cited by 4 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 17 publications

(41 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is because bilateral trade flows would incur the cost of not being in the EU but benefit from the effects of an FTA. See Cappariello et al (2020). Analysis also points to a significant deterioration in GVC ties between the United Kingdom and the European Union in the long term.…”

Section: Chart 14mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Global Value Chains: Measurement, Trends and Drivers

Cigna

Gunnella

Quaglietti³

2022

SSRN Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Chart 14mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Panel b: effects from a free trade agreement between the United Kingdom and the rest of the European Union. SeeCappariello et al (2020) for further details.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Global Value Chains: Measurement, Trends and Drivers

Cigna

Gunnella

Quaglietti³

2022

SSRN Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Agricultural tariffs are even higher. Average tariffs imposed on final goods imported to the UK are estimated to amount to 8.6% (Cappariello et al 2018). Non-tariff costs would also increase.…”

Section: British Final Import Demand and Eu Gross Output After Brexitmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…6 Higher import prices will lead to less import demand. We use the post-Brexit tariffs, trade elasticities and non-tariff trade barrier estimates provided by Cappariello et al (2018) and Cappariello et al (2020) to estimate the country-sector specific trade effects of tariffs and non-tariff trade barriers on final goods imported from the remaining EU countries to the UK. Denote the sector-specific tariff for final goods imports by τ ℓ y , the absolute sector-specific trade elasticity by ǫ ℓ , and the sector-specific non-tariff trade barrier ad-valorem equivalent by µ ℓ ( ℓ = 1, .…”

Section: British Final Import Demand and Eu Gross Output After Brexitmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

International trade barriers and regional employment: the case of a no-deal Brexit

Brautzsch

Holtemöller

2021

Economic Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We use the World Input–Output Database (WIOD) combined with regional sectoral employment data to estimate the potential regional employment effects of international trade barriers. We study the case of a no-deal Brexit in which imports to the United Kingdom (UK) from the European Union (EU) would be subject to tariffs and non-tariff trade costs. First, we derive the decline in UK final goods imports from the EU from industry-specific international trade elasticities, tariffs and non-tariff trade costs. Using input–output analysis, we estimate the potential output and employment effects for 56 industries and 43 countries on the national level. The absolute effects would be largest in big EU countries which have close trade relationships with the UK, such as Germany and France. However, there would also be large countries outside the EU which would be heavily affected via global value chains, such as China, for example. The relative effects (in percent of total employment) would be largest in Ireland followed by Belgium. In a second step, we split up the national effects on the NUTS-2 level for EU member states and additionally on the county (NUTS-3) level for Germany. The share of affected workers varies between 0.03% and 3.4% among European NUTS-2 regions and between 0.15% and 0.4% among German counties. A general result is that indirect effects via global value chains, i.e., trade in intermediate inputs, are more important than direct effects via final demand.

show abstract

Validating India’s Withdrawal from RCEP and Its Regional Future

Jain

2024

J. Intl Econ. Comm. Policy.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The withdrawal of India from negotiations on the world’s largest trade pact, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), in November 2019 was a major setback for proponents of regional economic unity. This paper tries to evaluate India’s concerns and also the way forward for India. A review of trade between RCEP countries post-implementation is done to analyze India’s stand against joining the block. India decided to opt out of the agreement because of adverse trade balance, impact on the dairy sector, economic slowdown, experience with Free trade agreements (FTAs), China factor, data localization, rules of origin, and the experience of ASEAN countries with Sino-FTA have been some of the factors responsible for this decision. Bilateral trade agreements with Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Korea, Rep.and ASEAN were already in place. So, trade between India and 12 RCEP member countries would not have changed after India’s inclusion in RCEP. There was fear of a massive surge in imported manufactures from China and dairy imports from Australia and New Zealand. This paper also evaluates the long-term repercussions of this decision and whether India missed out on becoming part of the global value chain & having greater market access through this block. India’s experience following protectionist policies did not yield the desired results in the past. So, an in-depth analysis has been done to validate if India has made a mistake by not joining RCEP or if India’s concerns and fears were justified and its regional future.

show abstract

Rising Protectionism and Global Value Chains: Quantifying the General Equilibrium Effects

Cited by 4 publications

References 17 publications

Global Value Chains: Measurement, Trends and Drivers

Global Value Chains: Measurement, Trends and Drivers

International trade barriers and regional employment: the case of a no-deal Brexit

Validating India’s Withdrawal from RCEP and Its Regional Future

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About