, Volume 45, Issue 2, pp 283–309 | Cite as

What explains indirect exports of goods and services in Eastern Europe and Central Asia?

  • Inmaculada Martínez-ZarzosoEmail author
  • Florian Johannsen
Original Paper


This paper investigates the determinants of indirect exporting, using firm-level data for 27 countries in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Indirect exporting depends on a combination of fixed and variable trade cost factors. We first hypothesize that firms that perceive customs, transportation, crime and legal systems as severe obstacles anticipate higher fixed costs and are more likely to export indirectly. The second hypothesis is that indirect exporting tends to be a temporary strategy. Econometric models are used to test the first hypothesis and transition matrices to test the second. In particular, probit, Heckman-probit and fractional response models are estimated to analyse the determinants of the export mode and the share of indirect exports. The results indicate that the factors that account for the fixed cost of exporting, mainly affect the decision to export indirectly (extensive margin), but some of them also affect, to a lesser extent, the amount exported indirectly (intensive margin). More specifically, factors such as customs and trade restrictions and transportation obstacles affect the extensive margin only, whereas crime affects both margins. Secondly, trade agreement membership mainly affects trade in manufactured goods, while exchange rate volatility affects positively the extensive and intensive margin of indirect exports of services. The results also indicate that firms are more likely to change their status as an indirect exporter than they are to change their status as a direct exporter or a non-exporter, which provides support to the second hypothesis.


Intermediaries Indirect exporting Eastern Europe Central Asia Uncertainty 

JEL Classification

F14 F15 L22 O24 



I would like to thank the comments and suggestions received from two anonymous referees and from the participants in the 1st Meeting on International Economics at the University Jaume I. Financial support from the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness is grateful acknowledged (ECO2014-58991-C3-2-R).


  1. Abel-Koch J (2013) Who uses intermediaries in international trade? Evidence from firm-level survey data. World Econ 36(8):1041–1064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahn J, Khandelwal AK, Wei S-J (2011) The role of intermediaries in facilitating trade. J Int Econ 84(1):73–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Akerman A (2014) A theory on the role of wholesalers in international trade based on economies of scope. Res Papers Econ 1–47Google Scholar
  4. Bernard AB, Jensen JB (2004) Why some firms export. Rev Econ Stat 86(2):561–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bernard AB et al (2003) Plants and productivity in international trade. Am Econ Rev 93(4):1268–1290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bernard AB, Grazzi M, Tomasi C (2015) Intermediaries in international trade: products and destinations. Rev Econ Stat 97(4):916–920CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blum BS, Claro S, Horstmann I (2010) Facts and figures on intermediated trade. Am Econ Rev 100(2):419–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Biglaiser G (1993) Middlemen as experts. RAND J Econ 24(2):212–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Crozet M, Lalanne G, Poncet S (2013) Wholesalers in international trade. Eur Econ Rev 58:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Darvas Z (2012) Real effective exchange rates for 178 countries: a new database. Working Paper 2012/06, Bruegel, 15 Mar 2012.
  11. De Groot H, Linders GJ et al (2004) The institutional determinants of bilateral trade patterns. Kyklos 57(1):103–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Felbermayr G, Jung B (2011) Trade intermediation and the organization of exporters. Rev Int Econ 19(4):634–648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. McCann F (2013) Indirect exporters. J Ind Compet Trade 13(4):519–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Melitz MJ (2003) The impact of trade on intra-industry reallocations and aggregate industry productivity. Econometrica 71(6):1695–1725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Oberhofer H, Pfaffermayr M (2012) Fractional response models—a replication exercise of Papke and Wooldridge (1996). Contemp Econ 6(3):56–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Papke LE, Wooldridge JM (1996) Econometric methods for fractional response variables with an application to 401(k) plan participation rates. J Appl Econ 11(6):619–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Roodman D (2011) Estimating fully observed recursive mixed-process models with cmp. Stata J 11:159–206Google Scholar
  18. Roodman D, Morduch J (2014) The impact of microcredit on the poor in Bangladesh: revisiting the evidence. J Dev Stud 50(4):583–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rubinstein A, Wolinsky A (1987) Middlemen. Q J Econ 102(3):581–593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Spulber DF (1999) Market microstructure. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Zerihun S (2012) A firm’s choice between direct and indirect export channel of exports by: a study of manufacturing firms in sub Saharan African Economies. Available at SSRN 2167982Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chair of Economic Theory and Development EconomicsGeorg-August Universität GöttingenGöttingenGermany
  2. 2.Universitat Jaume ICastellóSpain

Personalised recommendations