(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)"> (This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)">
[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tuf/tuftec/0109.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Multilateral, Regional, and Bilateral Trade-Policy Options for the United States and Japan

Author

Listed:
  • Drusilla K. Brown
  • Alan V. Deardorff
  • Robert M. Stern
Abstract
We have used the Michigan Model of World Production and Trade to simulate the economic effects on the United States, Japan, and other major trading countries/regions of the Doha Round of WTO multilateral trade negotiations and a variety of regional/bilateral free trade agreements (FTAs) involving the United States and Japan. We estimate that an assumed reduction of post-Uruguay Round tariffs and other barriers on agricultural and industrial products and services by 33 percent in the Doha Round would increase world welfare by $686.4 billion, with gains of $164.0 billion for the United States, $132.6 billion for Japan, and significant gains for all other industrialized and developing countries/regions. If there were global free trade with all post-Uruguay Round trade barriers completely removed, world welfare would increase by $2.1 trillion, with gains of $497.0 billion (5.5 percent of GNP) for the United States and $401.9 billion (6.2 percent of GNP) for Japan. Regional agreements such as an APEC FTA, an ASEAN Plus 3 FTA, and a Western Hemisphere FTA would increase global and member country welfare but much less so than the Doha multilateral trade round would. Separate bilateral FTAs involving Japan with Singapore, Mexico, Chile, and Korea and the United States with Chile, Singapore, and Korea would have positive, though generally small, welfare effects on the partner countries, but potentially disruptive sectoral employment shifts in some countries. There would be trade diversion and detrimental welfare effects on some nonmember countries for both the regional and bilateral FTAs analyzed. The welfare gains from multilateral trade liberalization are therefore considerably greater than the gains from preferential trading arrangements and more uniformly positive for all countries.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Drusilla K. Brown & Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M. Stern, 2001. "Multilateral, Regional, and Bilateral Trade-Policy Options for the United States and Japan," Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University 0109, Department of Economics, Tufts University.
    • Handle: RePEc:tuf:tuftec:0109
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ase.tufts.edu/econ/papers/200109.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas W. Hertel & Bernard M. Hoekman & Will Martin, 2002. "Developing Countries and a New Round of WTO Negotiations," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 17(1), pages 113-140.
    2. Harrison, W Jill & Pearson, K R, 1996. "Computing Solutions for Large General Equilibrium Models Using GEMPACK," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 9(2), pages 83-127, May.
    3. Drusilla K. Brown & Robert M. Stern, 2001. "Measurement and Modeling of the Economic Effects of Trade and Investment Barriers in Services," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(2), pages 262-286, May.
    4. Hertel, Thomas W. & Will Martin, 1999. "Would Developing Countries Gain from Inclusion of Manufactures in the WTO Negotiations?," GTAP Working Papers 397, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    5. Thomas W. Hertel & Terrie Walmsley & Ken Itakura, 2005. "Dynamic Effects Of The "New Age" Free Trade Agreement Between Japan And Singapore," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Philippa Dee & Michael Ferrantino (ed.), Quantitative Methods For Assessing The Effects Of Non-Tariff Measures And Trade Facilitation, chapter 18, pages 483-523, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Wolfgang F. Stolper & Paul A. Samuelson, 1941. "Protection and Real Wages," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 9(1), pages 58-73.
    7. Thomas W. Hertel & Terrie Walmsley & Ken Itakura, 2005. "Dynamic Effects Of The "New Age" Free Trade Agreement Between Japan And Singapore," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Philippa Dee & Michael Ferrantino (ed.), Quantitative Methods For Assessing The Effects Of Non-Tariff Measures And Trade Facilitation, chapter 18, pages 483-523, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Drusilla K. Brown & Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M Stern, 2001. "Impacts on NAFTA Members of Multilateral and Regional Trading Arrangements and Initiatives and Harmonization of NAFTA's External Tariffs," Working Papers 471, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    9. Drusilla K. Brown & Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M. Stern, 2000. "Computational Analysis of the Accession of Chile to the NAFTA and Western Hemisphere Integration," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(2), pages 145-174, February.
    10. Drusilla K. Brown & Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M. Stern, 2001. "CGE Modeling and Analysis of Multilateral and Regional Negotiating Options," Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University 0108, Department of Economics, Tufts University.
    11. Bernard Hoekman, 2000. "The next round of services negotiations: identifying priorities and options," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, vol. 82(Jul), pages 31-52.
    12. repec:bla:reviec:v:9:y:2001:i:2:p:262-86 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Hertel, Thomas W. & Will Martin, 1999. "Would Developing Countries Gain from Inclusion of Manufactures in the WTO Negotiations?," GTAP Working Papers 397, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    14. Thomas W. Hertel, 2000. "Potential gains from reducing trade barriers in manufacturing, services and agriculture," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, vol. 82(Jul), pages 77-104.
    15. Warwick McKibbin & Jong-Wha Lee & Inkyo Cheong, 2004. "A dynamic analysis of the Korea-Japan free trade area: simulations with the G-cubed Asia-Pacific model," International Economic Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 3-32.
    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. Drusilla K. Brown & Kozo Kiyota & Robert M. Stern, 2006. "Computational Analysis of the Menu of US‐Japan Trade Policies," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 805-855, June.
    2. Drusilla K. Brown & Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M. Stern, 2003. "Developing Countries' Stake in the Doha Round," Working Papers 495, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    3. Drusilla K. Brown & Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M Stern, 2002. "Computational Analysis of Multilateral Trade Liberalization in the Uruguay Round and Doha Development Round," Working Papers 489, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    4. Brown, Drusilla K. & Kiyota, Kozo & Stern, Robert M., 2005. "Computational analysis of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA)," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 153-185, August.
    5. Drusilla K. Brown & Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M Stern, 2001. "CGE Modeling and Analysis of Multilateral and Regional Negotiating Options," Working Papers 468, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    6. Drusilla K. Brown & Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M Stern, 2001. "Impacts on NAFTA Members of Multilateral and Regional Trading Arrangements and Initiatives and Harmonization of NAFTA's External Tariffs," Working Papers 471, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    7. Elisabeth M. Christen & Joseph Francois & Bernard Hoekman, 2012. "CGE Modeling of Market Access in Services," Economics working papers 2012-08, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
    8. Christen, Elisabeth & Francois, Joseph & Hoekman, Bernard, 2013. "Computable General Equilibrium Modeling of Market Access in Services," Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, in: Peter B. Dixon & Dale Jorgenson (ed.), Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 1601-1643, Elsevier.
    9. Rivera, Sandra A. & Tsigas, Marinos E., 2005. "How does China’s growth affect India? An Economywide Analysis," Conference papers 331359, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    10. Drusilla K. Brown & Kozo Kiyota & Robert M. Stern, 2004. "Computational Analysis of the U.S FTA with the Southern African Customs Union (SACU)," Working Papers 514, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    11. 武田 史郎, 2007. "貿易政策を対象とした応用一般均衡分析," Discussion Papers (Japanese) 07010, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    12. Kozo Kiyota & Robert M. Stern, 2007. "Economic Effects of a Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement," Working Papers 557, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    13. Gehlhar, Mark & Wainio, John, 2004. "Feasibility of Reducing Agricultural Protection: Implications for Farm Households," Conference papers 331293, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    14. Elena Ianchovichina & Terrie Walmsley, 2005. "Impact of China's WTO Accession on East Asia," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 23(2), pages 261-277, April.
    15. Stone, Susan F. & Strutt, Anna & Hertel, Thomas, 2009. "Assessing Socioeconomic Impacts of Transport Infrastructure Projects in the Greater Mekong Subregion," Conference papers 331872, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    16. John Asafu‐Adjaye & Renuka Mahadevan, 2009. "Regional Trade Agreements versus Global Trade Liberalisation: Implications for a Small Island Developing State," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 509-529, March.
    17. Chadha, R. & Brown, D.K. & Deardorff, A.V. & Stern, R.M., 2000. "Computational Analysis of the Impact on India of the Uruguay Round and the Forthcoming WTO Trade Negotiations," Working Papers 459, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    18. Phouphet Kyophilavong & Xaignasack Lassachack & Thanouxay Volavong, 2016. "Do cash transfers help the poor during trade liberalization? Evidence from Laos," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 19(4), pages 355-371, December.
    19. Konan, Denise Eby & Maskus, Keith E., 2006. "Quantifying the impact of services liberalization in a developing country," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 142-162, October.
    20. Drusilla Brown & Kozo Kiyota & Robert Stern, 2006. "An Analysis of the U.S.-SACU FTA Negotiations," Working Papers 545, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F10 - International Economics - - Trade - - - General
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration

    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:tuf:tuftec:0109. 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: Marcus Weir (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://ase.tufts.edu/economics .

    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.