Regionalism and gravity

Scottish Journal of Political Economy

Volumn 49, Issue 5, 2002, Pages 574-585

  Greenaway, David ^a   Milner, Chris ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GRAVITY; INTERNATIONAL TRADE; METHODOLOGY; REGIONALISM;

EID: 0042425846     PISSN: 00369292     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1467-9485.00249     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. ANDERSON, J. E. (1979). A theoretical foundation for the gravity equation. American Economic Review, 69, pp. 106-16.
2. ANDERSON, J. E. and VAN WINCOOP, E. (2001). Gravity with gravitas: a solution to the border puzzle. NBER Working Paper no. 8079.
3. BALDWIN, R. (1994). Towards an Integrated Europe. London. CEPR.
4. BALDWIN, R. (1997). The causes of regionalism. The World Economy. 20, pp. 247-81.
5. BERGSTRAND, J. (1985). The gravity equation in international trade: some microeconomic foundations and empirical evidence. Review of Economics and Statistics, 67, pp. 474-81.
6. BERGSTRAND, J. (1989). The generalised gravity equation, monopolistic competition and the factor-proportions theory in international trade. Review of Economics and Statistics, 71, pp. 143-53.
7. BHAGWATI, J., GREENAWAY, D. and PANAGARIYA, A. (1998). Trading preferentially: theory and policy. Economic Journal, 108, pp. 1128-48.
8. BIKKER, J. A. (1987). An international trade flow model with substitution: an extension of the gravity model. Kyklos, 40, pp. 315-37.
9. BRADA, J. C. and MENDEZ, J. A. (1985). Economic integration among developed, developing and centrally planned economics: a comparative analysis. Review of Economics and Statistics, 67, pp. 549-56.
10. DEARDORFF, A. V. (1998). Determinants of bilateral trade: does gravity work in a neoclassical world? In J. A. Frankel (ed.), The Regionalisation of the World Economy. Chicago, University of Chicago Press for the NBER, pp. 7-22.
11. DHAR, S. and PANAGARIYA, A. (1999). Is East Asia less open than North America and the EEC? No. In J. Piggott and A. Woodland (eds.). International Trade Policy and the Pacific Rim. London, Macmillan.
12. EATON, J. and KORTUM, S. (2001). Technology, geography and trade. Boston University.
13. EGGER, P. (2000). A note on the proper econometric specification of the gravity equation. Economics Letters, 66, pp. 25-31.
14. EGGER, P. (2002). An econometric view of the estimation of gravity models and the calculation of trade potentials. The World Economy, 25, pp. 297-312.
15. EVENETT, S. J. and KELLER, W. (2002). On theories explaining the success of the gravity model. Journal of Political Economy, 110, pp. 281-316.
16. FINGER, J., NG, M. F. and SOLOAGA, I. (1998). Trade Policies in the Caribbean Countries: A Look at the Positive Agenda. Caribbean Group for Co-operation on Economic Development, Washington, DC.
17. FRANKEL, J., STEIN, E. and WEI, S. (1995). Trading blocs and the Americas: the natural and unnatural and the super-natural. Journal of Development Economics, 47, pp. 61-95.
18. GREENAWAY, D. (2000). Multilateralism, minilateralism and trade expansion. In D. Das (ed.), Asian Exports. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
19. HAMILTON, C. B. and WINTERS, L. A. (1992). Opening up international trade with Eastern Europe. Economic Policy, 14, pp. 77-116.
20. HARRIGAN, J. (2002). Specialisation and the volume of trade: do the data obey the laws? In K. Choi and J. Harrigan (eds.), The Handbook of International Trade. Blackwell. Forthcoming.
21. HASSAN, M. K. (2001). Is SAARC a viable economic bloc? Evidence from gravity model. Journal of Asian Economics, 12, pp. 263-90.
22. HELPMAN, E. and KRUGMAN, P. (1985). Market Structure and Foreign Trade: Increasing Returns, Imperfect Competition and the International Economy. Cambridge, MIT Press.
23. LEAMER, E. E. and STERN, R. M. (1970). Quantitative International Economics. Boston, Allyn and Bacon.
24. LINNEMAN, H. (1966). An Econometric Study of International Trade Flows. Amsterdam, North Holland.
25. MÁTIJAS, L. (1997). Proper econometric specification of the gravity model. The World Economy, 20, pp. 363-68.
26. NILSSON, L. (2000). Trade integration and the EU economic membership criteria. European Journal of Political Economy, 165, pp. 807-27.
27. NILSSON, L. (2002). Trade relations: is the roadmap from Lomé to Cotonou correct? Applied Economics, 34, pp. 439-52.
28. POLAK, J. (1996). Is APEC a natural trading bloc? A critique of the gravity model in international trade. The World Economy, 19, pp. 533-44.
29. POYHONEN, P. (1963). A tentative model for the volume of trade between countries. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 90, pp. 93-99.
30. SAPIR, A. (2001). Domino effects in Western European regional trade, 1960-1992. European Journal of Political Economy, 17, pp. 377-88.
31. SHARMA, S. C. and CHUA, S. Y. (2000). ASEAN economic integration and intra-regional trade. Applied Economic Letters, 17, pp. 165-69.
32. SOLOAGA, I. and WINTERS, A. (1999). How has regionalism in the 1990s affected trade policy? Research Working Paper WPS 2156. World Bank, Washington, DC.
33. TINBERGEN, J. (1962). Shaping the World Economy. New York, Twentieth Century Fund.
34. WANG, Z. K. and WINTERS, L. A. (1991). The trading potential of Eastern Europe. Discussion Paper no. 610. London, CEPR.