Sino-EU15 Export Competition in Central and Eastern Europe: Is China Crowding Out Exports from the EU15?

Stanojević, Savo; Qiu, Bin; Chen, Jian

doi:10.1080/00128775.2020.1712554

Cited by 11 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Columns (1) to (4) of Table 3 illustrate the results of the baseline estimation, while columns (5) to (8) the results obtained after the introduction of time fixed effects. Columns (1), (2), (5), and (6) present the results of the estimation of exports and imports, while columns (3), ( 4), (7), and (8) show the results of the estimation of varieties of imports and exports, respectively. It can be noticed that the model fits data well and that signs of the gravity variables are consistent with theoretical expectations.…”

Section: Quantitative Analysis and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A series of studies highlighted the need for the 17 CEEC to diversify in terms of foreign trade and investment, which encouraged them to strive for closer economic relations with China [4][5][6]. A study by Stanojevic, Qiu and Chen (2020) [7] examined export competition between the EU15 (so-called old EU members) and China in the 16 CEEC markets (Greece was not a part of the cooperation mechanism at the time). They found a positive correlation between China's exports and exports from the EU15 when observing sectors of machinery and electronics while crowding out of exports from the EU15 by Chinese exports was detected in the sector of textile and furniture.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A study on the impact of EU membership on Sino-CEEC trade in the context of the 17+1 cooperation mechanism

Stanojević¹,

Qiu²

2022

International Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines trade relations between the 17 Central and Eastern European countries (CEEC) and China, which are members of the 17+1 Cooperation mechanism. Given that some CEECs are not members of the European Union, while others are, this study aims to examine the impact of EU membership on their trade relations with China. The analysis of the data shows that countries that are EU members tend to have a larger volume of trade, as well as a larger range of products that are traded. In contrast, higher growth rates of trade between non-EU CEEEs and China could indicate that EU membership is hampering Sino-CEEC trade. Finally, econometric analysis, based on the gravity model, suggests that EU membership has a positive and significant contribution to Sino-CEEC trade.

show abstract

Section: Quantitative Analysis and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

A study on the impact of EU membership on Sino-CEEC trade in the context of the 17+1 cooperation mechanism

Stanojević¹,

Qiu²

2022

International Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…But still has not extensively examined influencing elements in terms of electronic‐telecommunications. Besides, due to the outstanding performance of East Asia, especially China in the export of high‐tech products, the changes in the global trade in high‐tech products and the research on the squeeze effect of Chinese high‐tech products exports on other developing countries have attracted attention widely (Edwards & Lawrence, 2010; Guerrieri & Milana, 1995; Kuroiwa, 2014; Pham et al., 2017; Schott, 2008; Stanojevic et al., 2020; Xing, 2014). Whether the same situation occurs in the trade pattern of electronic‐communications and what position China and other nations are in, are matters worth investigating.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More academics are paying attention to the impact of technology on the traditional international trading system, and their empirical study on the trade structure of high-tech items has gotten stronger. (Pham et al, 2017;Stanojevic et al, 2020). It focuses on the trade scale, export structure, trade mode, issues, and countermeasures of hightech products between a country or a group of countries (Kandogan, 2017;Xing, 2011), but it rarely considers global trade imbalances in high-tech products or changes in the trading system.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

From the United States to China? A trade perspective to reveal the structure and dynamics of global electronic‐telecommunications

Duan

Xia

2022

Growth and Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite contributions, most of the studies on electronic‐telecommunications trade are conducted within the framework of a global value chain and mainly based on an enterprise‐level. The global trade structure and dynamics of electronic‐telecommunications are still mysterious. In this paper, by deriving trade data of electronic‐telecommunications between countries (regions) from the UN Comtrade Database, characteristics in product, space and network of the global electronic‐telecommunications trade from 2000 to 2017 are explored, and the factors influencing its evolution. The results indicate that telecommunications equipment is gradually replacing electronic integrated circuits, thus leading the development of global trade on electronic‐telecommunications. In space, the global import pattern of electronic‐telecommunications has always been a tri‐polar pattern dominated by Asia‐Pacific, Europe, and North America, while the geography of global electronic‐telecommunications export has undergone fundamental changes, most notably the rise of the East Asia region represented by Mainland China. The global trade center in electronic and communication products has changed from USA to China. In terms of network structure, the global electronic‐telecommunications trade network continues to expand, showing significant small‐world and core‐peripheral characteristics, and a more competitive multi‐centric core is observed. In addition, Quadratic Assignment Procedure analysis indicates that culture proximity, innovation differences, and manufacturing differences have a positive effect on the international trade, while geographical distance, economic gap, openness gap, trade gap, and infrastructure gap play negative roles.

show abstract

“…On one hand, CEE countries took a diversification path of the exports market following the financial crisis in 2008 and became more oriented towards China (Oehler-Şincai, 2016). On the other hand, China seized the opportunity to increase its market share in this region after the World Trade Organization accession (Stanojevic et al, 2020) and pursued its aim by developing the 16 þ 1 framework of Cooperation in the global approach of China's Belt and Road Initiative. As a consequence, the trade increases between CEE countries and East Asia were more dynamic than with the rest of the EU countries in the last period, especially on the import component from China ( Eltet} o & Szunom ar, 2016).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

An empirical analysis using panel data gravity models and scenario forecast simulations for the Romanian exports in the context of COVID-19

Davidescu

Popovici

Strat

2021

Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper focuses on the trade performance of Romania, a representative country for the Central and Eastern European region, strongly connected with its European partners in global value chains and thus affected by any change in these countries' relationships with the rest of the world in general and China in particular. Using panel data gravity models for the 2008-2019 period, we find that Romania's exports are significantly influenced by the demand of its major trade partners in the EU, and imports from China and the rest of the world. In addition, exports are vulnerable to the effectiveness of the government in relation to the other countries, corruption control and cultural values such as collectivism. We also assess the capacity of Romanian exports to regain their ascending trend displayed before the COVID-19 pandemic by using simulation forecasting scenarios based on the shape of the economic recovery and the type of shock transmission across economies. We observe a sharp decrease in 2020 followed by an important recovery in 2021 in a V-shape scenario and uniform transmission of the pandemic shock in the internal demand and in the foreign trade, or followed by a very slow recovery in 2021 (in a U-shape scenario and non-uniform transmission type in the two previously mentioned elements), especially when the global relation with rest of the world is included.

show abstract

Sino-EU15 Export Competition in Central and Eastern Europe: Is China Crowding Out Exports from the EU15?

Cited by 11 publications

References 35 publications

A study on the impact of EU membership on Sino-CEEC trade in the context of the 17+1 cooperation mechanism

A study on the impact of EU membership on Sino-CEEC trade in the context of the 17+1 cooperation mechanism

From the United States to China? A trade perspective to reveal the structure and dynamics of global electronic‐telecommunications

An empirical analysis using panel data gravity models and scenario forecast simulations for the Romanian exports in the context of COVID-19

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About