Independence Status of Territories and the Estimated Trade Effects of Regional Trade Agreements

Hou, Jia (2020): Independence Status of Territories and the Estimated Trade Effects of Regional Trade Agreements.

Abstract

Almost 150 new sovereignties came into existence since 1945, which is about two times the amount of independent countries by then. New individuals are included by panel datasets based on country level data. In this paper I investigate the impact of panel unbalancedness related to independence status of territories on the estimation of trade effects of regional trade agreements. I first find that the inclusion or exclusion of newly independent countries affects estimation of interest significantly, so future empirical studies using country level data are recommended to verify more seriously about why including some newly independent countries or dependent territories but not others in their samples. Second, although changing independence status of territories raises up the question of interpreting trade data as “domestic” or “international” to (previous) governing countries (Greaves, 1954), I find that both ways of interpreting trade data yield similar estimates of most regional trade agreements. Third, it is shown that unless we are particularly interested in the trade effects of regional trade agreements formed before 1990, we should not include observations before this time into the sample. At last, the Monte-Carlo simulation shows that panel unbalancedness caused by emergence of new countries has different impact on the estimation of interest from missing at random or missing at minimum values.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Regional trade agreements; Panel unbalancedness
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C1 - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General > C18 - Methodological Issues: General; F - International Economics > F1 - Trade > F15 - Economic Integration; F - International Economics > F5 - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy > F53 - International Agreements and Observance ; International Organizations

References

Aitken, N. D. (1973). The effect of the EEC and EFTA on european trade: A temporal cross-section analysis. The American Economic Review 63(5), 881–892.

Amiti, M. (1998). Inter-industry trade in manufactures: Does country size matter? Journal of International Economics 44(2), 231–255.

Anderson, J. E. and E. Van Wincoop (2003). Gravity with gravitas: A solution to the border puzzle. American Economic Review 93(1), 170–192.

Baier, S. L. and J. H. Bergstrand (2007). Do free trade agreements actually increase members’ international trade? Journal of International Economics 71(1), 72–95.

Baier, S. L., J. H. Bergstrand, and M. W. Clance (2018). Heterogeneous effects of economic integration agreements. Journal of Development Economics 135(C), 587–608.

Baier, S. L., Y. V. Yotov, and T. Zylkin (2019). On the widely differing effects of free trade agreements: Lessons from twenty years of trade integration. Journal of International Economics 116(C), 206–226.

Baldwin, R. and D. Taglioni (2007). Trade effects of the euro: A comparison of estimators. Journal of Economic Integration, 780–818.

Baltagi, B. H. and S. H. Song (2006). Unbalanced panel data: A survey. Statistical Papers 47(4), 493–523.

Baltagi, B. H., S. H. Song, and B. C. Jung (2002). A comparative study of alternative estimators for the unbalanced two-way error component regression model. The Econometrics Journal 5(2), 480–493.

Bruno, G. S. (2005). Estimation and inference in dynamic unbalanced panel-data models with a small number of individuals. The Stata Journal 5(4), 473–500.

Caliendo, L. and F. Parro (2015). Estimates of the Trade and Welfare Effects of NAFTA. Review of Economic Studies 82(1), 1–44.

Cipollina, M. and L. Salvatici (2010). Reciprocal trade agreements in gravity models: A meta-analysis. Review of International Economics 18(1), 63–80.

Di Giovanni, J. and A. A. Levchenko (2012). Country size, international trade, and aggregate fluctuations in granular economies. Journal of Political Economy 120(6), 1083–1132.

Egger, P. and M. Larch (2008). Interdependent preferential trade agreement memberships: An empirical analysis. Journal of International Economics 76(2), 384–399.

Egger, P., M. Larch, K. E. Staub, and R.Winkelmann (2011). The Trade Effects of Endogenous Preferential Trade Agreements. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy 3(3), 113–143.

Ghosh, S. and S. Yamarik (2004). Are regional trading arrangements trade creating?: An application of extreme bounds analysis. Journal of International Economics 63(2), 369–395.

Greaves, I. (1954). The character of British colonial trade. Journal of Political Economy 62(1), 1–11.

Head, K. and T. Mayer (2014). Gravity equations: Workhorse, toolkit, and cookbook. In Handbook of International Economics, Volume 4, pp. 131–195. Elsevier.

Head, K., J. Ries, and T. Mayer (2010). The erosion of colonial trade linkages after independence. Journal of International Economics 81, 1–14.

Helpman, E., M. Melitz, and Y. Rubinstein (2008). Estimating trade flows: Trading partners and trading volumes. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 123(2), 441– 487.

Kallab, T. E. (2018). French colonial trade patterns: Facts and impacts. African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 13(311-2018-2940), 15–30.

Kharel, P. (2019). The effect of free trade agreements revisited: Does residual trade cost bias matter? Review of International Economics 27(1), 367–389.

Kohl, T. (2014). Do we really know that trade agreements increase trade? Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv) 150(3), 443–469.

Kyriazidou, E. (1997). Estimation of a panel data sample selection model. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 1335–1364.

Larch, M., J. Wanner, Y. V. Yotov, and T. Zylkin (2018). Currency unions and trade: A ppml re-assessment with high-dimensional fixed effects. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics.

Mika, A. and R. Zymek (2018). Friends without benefits? New EMU members and the ’Euro Effect’ on trade. Journal of International Money and Finance 83, 75–92.

Nijman, T. and M. Verbeek (1992). Nonresponse in panel data: The impact on estimates of a life cycle consumption function. Journal of Applied Econometrics 7(3), 243–257.

Pampaka, M., G. Hutcheson, and J. Williams (2016). Handling missing data: analysis of a challenging data set using multiple imputation. International Journal of Research & Method in Education 39(1), 19–37.

Pasteels, J.-M. (2013). Review of best practice methodologies for imputing and harmonising data in cross-country datasets. Available at: natlex. ilo. ch/wcmsp5/groups/public/—dgreports/— stat/documents/genericdocument/wcms 389375. pdf .

Rodrik, D. (2018, Spring). What Do Trade Agreements Really Do? Journal of Economic Perspectives 32(2), 73–90.

Semykina, A. and J. M. Wooldridge (2010). Estimating panel data models in the presence of endogeneity and selection. Journal of Econometrics 157(2), 375–380.

Silva, J. S. and S. Tenreyro (2006). The log of gravity. The Review of Economics and statistics 88(4), 641–658.

Soloaga, I. and L. A. Wintersb (2001). Regionalism in the nineties: What effect on trade? The North American Journal of Economics and Finance 12(1), 1–29.

Tinbergen, J. (1962). Shaping the world economy: Suggestions for an international economic policy. Books (Jan Tinbergen).

Verbeek, M. and T. Nijman (1992). Testing for selectivity bias in panel data models. International Economic Review, 681–703.

Wansbeek, T. and A. Kapteyn (1989). Estimation of the error-components model with incomplete panels. Journal of Econometrics 41(3), 341–361.