[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mie/wpaper/664.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comparative Advantage in Digital Trade

Author

Listed:
  • Alan V. Deardorff

    (University of Michigan)

Abstract
Digital trade takes a variety of forms, several of which are examined here with regard to whether they can be explained by comparative advantage. The five forms of digital trade considered are 1) physical products that are advertised, ordered, and/or paid for digitally, but transported by normal trade means; 2) digital products (music, movies, books, software) that are transmitted to purchasers via the internet and are most likely to be marketed and paid for via that as well; 3) services that are provided remotely by digital means; 4) data storage and computer applications accessible in the ÒcloudÓ; and 5) web platforms that serve an international audience and are supported by advertising. I argue that the first three of these can be well explained by comparative advantage, but there are problems with the last two.

Suggested Citation

  • Alan V. Deardorff, 2017. "Comparative Advantage in Digital Trade," Working Papers 664, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    • Handle: RePEc:mie:wpaper:664
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.fordschool.umich.edu/rsie/workingpapers/Papers651-675/r663.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anderson, James E. & Neary, J. Peter, 2007. "Welfare versus market access: The implications of tariff structure for tariff reform," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 187-205, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sébastien Jean & David Laborde & Will Martin, 2008. "Choosing Sensitive Agricultural Products in Trade Negotiations," Working Papers 2008-18, CEPII research center.
    2. Theodore Palivos & Nikos Tsakiris, 2011. "Trade and Tax Reforms in a Cash‐in‐Advance Economy," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 77(4), pages 1014-1032, April.
    3. Stéphane Becuwe & Bertrand Blancheton, 2014. "The dispersion of customs tariffs in France between 1850 and 1913: Discrimination in trade policy," Research in Economic History, in: Research in Economic History, volume 30, pages 163-183, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    4. Hiau LooiKee & Alessandro Nicita & Marcelo Olarreaga, 2009. "Estimating Trade Restrictiveness Indices," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(534), pages 172-199, January.
    5. Hiau Looi Kee & Alessandro Nicita & Marcelo Olarreaga, 2008. "Import Demand Elasticities and Trade Distortions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 90(4), pages 666-682, November.
    6. Kreickemeier, Udo & Raimondos-Møller, Pascalis, 2008. "Tari[ff]-tax reforms and market access," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 85-91, August.
    7. Sajal Lahiri & Peri Silva, 2016. "Potential Pareto-Improving Move Toward Most Favored Nation Tariffs," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 54(2), pages 1086-1104, April.
    8. Rod Falvey & Udo Kreickemeier, 2017. "Tariff Reforms with Rigid Wages," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: International Trade and Labor Markets Welfare, Inequality and Unemployment, chapter 4, pages 95-116, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    9. Pascalis Raimondos-Møller & Alan Woodland, 2014. "Steepest ascent tariff reform," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 55(1), pages 69-99, January.
    10. James E. Anderson & J. Peter Neary, 2013. "Revenue Tariff Reform," NBER Working Papers 19752, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Jenny Ligthart & Gerard C. van der Meijden, 2010. "Coordinated Tax-Tariff Reforms, Informality, and Welfare Distribution," CESifo Working Paper Series 3107, CESifo.
    12. Michał BURZYŃSKI, 2014. "Trading Goods or Human Capital The Winners and Losers of Economic Integration," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2014022, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    13. David Laborde & Will Martin & Dominique van der Mensbrugghe, 2017. "Measuring the Impacts of Global Trade Reform with Optimal Aggregators of Distortions," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 403-425, May.
    14. Raimondos, Pascalis & Woodland, Alan, 2018. "Reciprocity in trade negotiations and welfare," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 134-142.
    15. Joaquim Bento Ferreira-Filho & Mark Horridge, 2011. "Ethanol Expansion and Indirect Land Use Change in Brazil," Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre Working Papers g-218, Victoria University, Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre.
    16. Maria Cipollina & Luca Salvatici, 2008. "Measuring Protection: Mission Impossible?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 577-616, July.
    17. Antoine Bouët & Simon Mevel & David Orden, 2007. "More or Less Ambition in the Doha Round: Winners and Losers from Trade Liberalisation with a Development Perspective," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(8), pages 1253-1280, August.
    18. Honkatukia, Juha, 2008. "What role subsidies? A CGE analysis of announcement effects of future policies on the development of emissions and energy consumption in Finland," Conference papers 331722, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    19. Tena-Junguito, Antonio & Lampe, Markus & Fernandes, Felipe Tâmega, 2012. "How Much Trade Liberalization Was There in the World Before and After Cobden-Chevalier?," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 72(3), pages 708-740, August.
    20. Cletus C. Coughlin, 2010. "Measuring international trade policy: a primer on trade restrictiveness indices," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, vol. 92(Sep), pages 381-394.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    digital trade; comparative advantage;

    JEL classification:

    • F1 - International Economics - - Trade
    • F11 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Neoclassical Models of Trade

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mie:wpaper:664. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: FSPP Webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/riumius.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.