[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/9839.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Together at Last: Trade Costs, Demand Structure, and Welfare

Author

Listed:
  • Neary, Peter
  • Mrázová, Monika
Abstract
We show that relaxing the assumption of CES preferences in monopolistic competition has surprising implications when trade is restricted. Integrated and segmented markets behave very differently, the latter typically implying a form of reciprocal dumping. Globalization and lower trade costs have very different effects: the former reduces spending on all existing varieties, the latter switches spending from home to imported varieties; in the plausible case where demands are less convex than CES, globalization raises firm output whereas lower trade costs reduce it. Finally, calibrating gains from trade is harder. Many more parameters need to be calibrated than in the CES case, while import demand elasticities are likely to overestimate the true elasticities, and so underestimate the gains from trade.

Suggested Citation

  • Neary, Peter & Mrázová, Monika, 2014. "Together at Last: Trade Costs, Demand Structure, and Welfare," CEPR Discussion Papers 9839, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:9839
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cepr.org/publications/DP9839
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/7o52iohb7k6srk09n8t832o04 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Novy, Dennis, 2013. "International trade without CES: Estimating translog gravity," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 271-282.
    3. Simonovska, Ina & Waugh, Michael E., 2014. "The elasticity of trade: Estimates and evidence," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 34-50.
    4. Evgeny Zhelobodko & Sergey Kokovin & Mathieu Parenti & Jacques‐François Thisse, 2012. "Monopolistic Competition: Beyond the Constant Elasticity of Substitution," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 80(6), pages 2765-2784, November.
    5. Melitz, Marc J. & Redding, Stephen J., 2013. "Firm heterogeneity and aggregate welfare," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 51533, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Monika Mrázová & J Peter Neary, 2019. "Selection Effects with Heterogeneous Firms," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 17(4), pages 1294-1334.
    7. Krugman, Paul, 1980. "Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the Pattern of Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 950-959, December.
    8. Ina Simonovska, 2015. "Income Differences and Prices of Tradables: Insights from an Online Retailer," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 82(4), pages 1612-1656.
    9. Bertoletti, Paolo & Epifani, Paolo, 2014. "Monopolistic competition: CES redux?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(2), pages 227-238.
    10. Simonovska, Ina & Waugh, Michael E., 2014. "The elasticity of trade: Estimates and evidence," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 34-50.
    11. W. M. Corden, 1960. "The Geometric Representation of Policies to Attain Internal and External Balance," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 28(1), pages 1-22.
    12. J. Peter Neary, 2009. "Putting the “New” into New Trade Theory: Paul Krugman's Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 111(2), pages 217-250, June.
    13. Ossa, Ralph, 2015. "Why trade matters after all," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(2), pages 266-277.
    14. Robert C. Feenstra & David E. Weinstein, 2017. "Globalization, Markups, and US Welfare," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 125(4), pages 1040-1074.
    15. Krugman, Paul R., 1979. "Increasing returns, monopolistic competition, and international trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 469-479, November.
    16. Ina Simonovska, 2009. "Income Differences and Prices of Tradables," 2009 Meeting Papers 692, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    17. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/7o52iohb7k6srk09n8t832o04 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Costas Arkolakis & Arnaud Costinot & Andres Rodriguez-Clare, 2012. "New Trade Models, Same Old Gains?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(1), pages 94-130, February.
    19. repec:wsr:wpaper:y:2012:i:088 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Robert A. Pollak, 1971. "Additive Utility Functions and Linear Engel Curves," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 38(4), pages 401-414.
    21. repec:cor:louvrp:-2488 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Maxim Goryunov & Sergey Kokovin & Takatoshi Tabuchi, 2022. "Continuous spatial monopolistic competition: matching goods with consumers," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 74(3), pages 793-832, October.
    2. Igor Bykadorov & Andrea Ellero & Stefania Funari & Sergey Kokovin & Pavel Molchanov, 2016. "Painful Birth of Trade Under Classical Monopolistic Competition," HSE Working papers WP BRP 132/EC/2016, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    3. Stark, Oded & Zawojska, Ewa & Kohler, Wilhelm & Szczygielski, Krzysztof, 2018. "An adverse social welfare effect of a doubly gainful trade," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 77-84.
    4. Wang, Xichao & Gibson, Mark J., 2015. "Trade, non-homothetic preferences, and the impact of country size on wages," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 121-124.
    5. Ligon, Ethan, 2016. "Some $\lambda$-separable Frisch demands with utility functions," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt1s06c2zp, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    6. Heiland, Inga & Kohler, Wilhelm, 2022. "Heterogeneous workers, trade, and migration," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    7. Marco Bee & Stefano Schiavo, 2018. "Powerless: gains from trade when firm productivity is not Pareto distributed," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 154(1), pages 15-45, February.
    8. Kokovin, Sergey & Molchanov, Pavel & Bykadorov, Igor, 2022. "Increasing returns, monopolistic competition, and international trade: Revisiting gains from trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    9. J. Peter Neary, 2016. "International Trade in General Oligopolistic Equilibrium," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(4), pages 669-698, September.
    10. Matveenko, Andrei, 2020. "Logit, CES, and rational inattention," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    11. Monika Mrázová & J. Peter Neary, 2017. "Not So Demanding: Demand Structure and Firm Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(12), pages 3835-3874, December.
    12. Igor A. Bykadorov & Alexey A. Gorn & Sergey G. Kokovin & Evgeny V. Zhelobodko, 2014. "Losses From Trade In Krugman’s Model: Almost Impossible," HSE Working papers WP BRP 61/EC/2014, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    13. Mrázová, Monika & Neary, J. Peter, 2020. "IO for exports(s)," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    14. Heid, Benedikt & Stähler, Frank, 2024. "Structural gravity and the gains from trade under imperfect competition: Quantifying the effects of the European Single Market," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    15. Abbassi, Abdessalem & Tamini, Lota D. & Dakhlaoui, Ahlem, 2015. "Import quota allocation between regions under Cournot competition," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 484-490.
    16. Lota D. Tamini & Zakaria Sorgho, 2018. "Trade in Environmental Goods: Evidences from an Analysis Using Elasticities of Trade Costs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 70(1), pages 53-75, May.
    17. Cees A. Withagen, 2018. "The Social Cost of Carbon and the Ramsey Rule," CESifo Working Paper Series 7359, CESifo.
    18. Dao‐Zhi Zeng & Shin‐Kun Peng, 2021. "Symmetric tax competition and welfare with footloose capital," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 472-491, March.
    19. Natalya Ayzenberg & Igor Bykadorov & Sergey Kokovin, 2018. "Optimal Reciprocal Import Tariffs Under Variable Elasticity Of Substitution," HSE Working papers WP BRP 204/EC/2018, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    20. Bykadorov, Igor & Gorn, Alexey & Kokovin, Sergey & Zhelobodko, Evgeny, 2015. "Why are losses from trade unlikely?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 35-38.
    21. Lota Dabio Tamini & Sorgho Zakaria, 2016. "Trade in environmental goods: how important are trade costs elasticities?," Cahiers de recherche CREATE 2016-3, CREATE.

    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. Monika Mrázová & J. Peter Neary, 2017. "Not So Demanding: Demand Structure and Firm Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(12), pages 3835-3874, December.
    2. Costas Arkolakis & Arnaud Costinot & Dave Donaldson & Andrés Rodríguez-Clare, 2019. "The Elusive Pro-Competitive Effects of Trade," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(1), pages 46-80.
    3. Mrázová, Monika & Neary, J. Peter, 2020. "IO for exports(s)," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    4. Feenstra, Robert C., 2018. "Restoring the product variety and pro-competitive gains from trade with heterogeneous firms and bounded productivity," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 16-27.
    5. Ziran Ding, 2022. "Firm heterogeneity, variable markups, and multinational production: A review from trade policy perspective," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(5), pages 1311-1357, December.
    6. Etro, Federico, 2017. "Research in economics and monopolistic competition," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(4), pages 645-649.
    7. Monika Mrázová & J. Peter Neary & Mathieu Parenti, 2021. "Sales and Markup Dispersion: Theory and Empirics," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(4), pages 1753-1788, July.
    8. Colin J. Hottman & Ryan Monarch, 2018. "Estimating Unequal Gains across U.S. Consumers with Supplier Trade Data," Working Papers 18-04, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    9. Peter Neary & Monika Mrazova, 2013. "Not so demanding: Preference structure, firm behavior, and welfare," Economics Series Working Papers 691, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    10. Head, Keith & Mayer, Thierry, 2014. "Gravity Equations: Workhorse,Toolkit, and Cookbook," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 131-195, Elsevier.
    11. Costinot, Arnaud & Rodríguez-Clare, Andrés, 2014. "Trade Theory with Numbers: Quantifying the Consequences of Globalization," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 197-261, Elsevier.
    12. Nocco, Antonella & Ottaviano, Gianmarco I.P. & Salto, Matteo, 2019. "Geography, competition, and optimal multilateral trade policy," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 145-161.
    13. Bas, Maria & Mayer, Thierry & Thoenig, Mathias, 2017. "From micro to macro: Demand, supply, and heterogeneity in the trade elasticity," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 1-19.
    14. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/dambferfb7dfprc9m01g1j1k2 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/dambferfb7dfprc9m01g1j1k2 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/dambferfb7dfprc9m01g1j1k2 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Simonovska, Ina & Waugh, Michael E., 2010. "The Elasticity of Trade: Estimates & Evidence," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 13, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    18. Paolo Bertoletti & Federico Etro, 2022. "Monopolistic competition, as you like it," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 60(1), pages 293-319, January.
    19. Bertoletti, Paolo & Epifani, Paolo, 2014. "Monopolistic competition: CES redux?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(2), pages 227-238.
    20. Bas, Maria & Mayer, Thierry & Thoenig, Mathias, 2017. "From micro to macro: Demand, supply, and heterogeneity in the trade elasticity," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 1-19.
    21. Thomas Sampson, 2016. "Dynamic Selection: An Idea Flows Theory of Entry, Trade, and Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 131(1), pages 315-380.
    22. Wang, Xichao & Gibson, Mark J., 2015. "Trade, non-homothetic preferences, and the impact of country size on wages," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 121-124.
    23. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/dambferfb7dfprc9m01g1j1k2 is not listed on IDEAS
    24. Martin Alfaro, 2022. "The microeconomics of new trade models," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(3), pages 1539-1565, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Super- and subconvexity of demand; Additively separable preferences; Ces preferences; Iceberg trade costs; Quantifying gains from trade; Super- and subconcavity of utility;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F12 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Models of Trade with Imperfect Competition and Scale Economies; Fragmentation
    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration
    • F17 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Forecasting and Simulation

    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:cpr:ceprdp:9839. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cepr.org .

    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.