Home-market and factor-endowment effects in a gravity approach

Review of World Economics

Volumn 142, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 330-353

  Schumacher, Dieter ^a   Siliverstovs, Boriss ^b  

^a DIW BERLIN   (Germany)

^b NONE

Author keywords

Bilateral trade; Comparative advantage; Factor endowment; Gravity model; Home market effect

Indexed keywords

EID: 33746909096     PISSN: 16102878     EISSN: 16102886     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10290-006-0070-z     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Anderson, J. E. (1979). A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation. American Economic Review 69 (1): 106-116.
2. Baier, S. L., and J. H. Bergstrand (2001). The Growth of World Trade: Tariffs, Transport Costs, and Income Similarity. Journal of International Economics 53 (1): 1-27.
3. Bergstrand, J. H. (1985). The Gravity Equation in International Trade: Some Microeconomic Foundations and Empirical Evidence. Review of Economics and Statistics 67 (3): 474-481.
4. Bergstrand, J. H. (1989). The Generalized Gravity Equation, Monopolistic Competition, and the Factor Proportions Theory in International Trade. Review of Economics and Statistics 71 (1): 143-153.
5. Bergstrand, J. H. (1990). The Heckscher-Ohlin-Samuelson Model, the Linder Hypothesis and the Determinants of Bilateral Intra-Industry Trade. Economic Journal 100 (403): 1216-1229.
6. Davis, D. R. (1998). The Home Market, Trade, and Industrial Structure. American Economic Review 88 (5): 1264-1276.
7. Davis, D. R., and D. E. Weinstein (1998). Market Access, Economic Geography and Comparative Advantage: An Empirical Test. NBER Working Paper 6787. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, Mass.
8. Davis, D. R., and D. E. Weinstein (1999). Economic Geography and Regional Production Structure: An Empirical Investigation. European Economic Review 43 (2): 379-409.
9. Davis, D. R., and D. E. Weinstein (2003). Market Access, Economic Geography and Comparative Advantage: An Empirical Test. Journal of International Economics 59 (1): 1-23.
10. Deardorff, A. (1982). The General Validity of the Heckscher-Ohlin Theorem. American Economic Review 72 (4): 683-694.
11. Deardorff, A. (1998). Determinants of Bilateral Trade: Does Gravity Work in a Neoclassical World? In J. A. Frankel (ed.), The Regionalization of the World Economy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12. Evenett, S. J., and W Keller (2001). On Theories Explaining the Success of the Gravity Equation. Journal of Political Economy 110 (2): 281-316.
13. Feenstra, R. C., J. A. Markusen, and A. K. Rose (1998). Understanding the Home Market Effect and the Gravity Equation: The Role of Differentiating Goods. NBER Working Paper 6804. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, Mass.
14. Feenstra, R. C., J. A. Markusen, and A. K. Rose (2001). Using the Gravity Equation to Differentiate among Alternative Theories of Trade. Canadian Journal of Economics 34 (2): 430-442.
15. Festoc, F. (1995). The Trade Potential in Sensitive Sectors between the European Union and the Central European Countries: Preliminary Results. Mimeo. Université de Nantes.
16. Fidrmuc, J. (1998). Effects of Integration of the CEEC into the EU on Austrian Trade Structure. In K. Pichelmann (ed.), The Economic Consequences of Eastern Enlargement of the European Union. The Austrian View. Research Report. Institute for Advanced Studies, Vienna.
17. Grossman, G. M. (1998). Comment. In J. A. Frankel (ed.), The Regionalization of the World Economy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
18. Harrigan, J. (2003). Specialization and the Volume of Trade: Do the Data Obey the Laws? In E. K. Choi and J. Harrigan (eds.), The Handbook of International Trade. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishing.
19. Hanson, G. H., and C. Xiang (2004). The Home Market Effect and Bilateral Trade Patterns. American Economic Review 94 (4): 1108-1129.
20. Head, K., and J. Ries (2001). Increasing Returns versus National Product Differentiation as an Explanation for the Pattern of U.S.-Canada Trade. The American Economic Review 91 (4): 858-876.
21. Head, K., T. Mayer, and J. Ries (2002). On the Pervasiveness of Home Market Effects. Economica 69 (275): 371-390.
22. Helpman, E., and P. Krugman (1985). Market Structure and Foreign Trade. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
23. Krugman, P. (1980). Scale Economies, Product Differentiation and the Pattern of Trade. American Economic Review 70 (5): 950-959.
24. Krugman, P. (1987). Pricing to Market When the Exchange Rate Changes. In S. W. Arndt and J. D. Richardson (eds.), Real-Financial Linkages among Open Economies. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
25. Lawrence, C., and P. T. Spiller (1986). Product Diversity, Economies of Scale, and International Trade. Quarterly Journal of Economics 98 (1): 63-83.
26. Rauch, J. R. (1999). Networks versus Markets in International Trade. Journal of International Economics 48 (1): 7-35.
27. Schumacher, D. (1992). A Note on the Human Capital Intensity of EC Trade. Cahiers Economiques de Bruxelles 133: 3-19.
28. Schumacher, D. (1997). Impact on German Trade of Increased Division of Labor with Eastern Europe. In S. W. Black (ed.), Europe's Economy Looks East. Implications for Germany and the European Union. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29. Trionfetti, F. (2001). Using Home-Biased Demand to Test Trade Theories. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv/Review of World Economics 137 (3): 404-426.
30. Vittas, H., and P. Mauro (1997). Potential Trade with Core and Periphery: Industry Differences in Trade Patterns. In S. W. Black (ed.), Europe's Economy Looks East. Implications for Germany and the European Union. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31. Weder, R. (2003). Comparative Home-Market Advantage: An Empirical Analysis of British and American Exports. Review of World Economics/ Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv 139 (2): 220-247.
32. Wood, A. (1994a). North-South Trade, Employment and Inequality. Changing Fortunes in a Skill-Driven World. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
33. Wood, A. (1994b). Give Heckscher and Ohlin a Chance. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv/Review of World Economics 130 (1): 20-49.