Skip to main content
Log in

Hub-and-Spokes Free Trade Agreements in the Presence of Technology Spillovers: An Application to the Western Hemisphere

  • Published:
Review of World Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Using a comparative-static general equilibrium model in the context of the Western Hemisphere, this paper compares the economic effects of a “hub-and-spokes” type of bilateral trade configuration (with Chile being the hub) with those of a more comprehensive regional FTA (namely, the FTAA). The model is augmented to account for the possibility of technology spillovers and its effective assimilation among participating economies. In particular, absorptive capacity, governance factor, proximity and socio-institutional congruence conjointly determine an economy’s capacity to capture the technology that is transmitted from the developed spoke United States to other regions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Anderson, J. E., and D. Marcouiller (2002). Insecurity and the Patterns of Trade: An Empirical Investigation. Review of Economics and Statistics 84 (2): 342–352.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Armington, P. A. (1969). A Theory of Demand for Products Distinguished by Place of Production. IMF Staff Papers 16 (July): 159–178.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Arora, V., and A. Vamvakidis (2004). How Much Do Trading Partners Matter for Economic Growth? IMF Working Paper 04/26. Washington, D.C.

  4. Baldwin, R. E. (1993). Measurable Dynamic Gains from Trade. Journal of Political Economy 100 (1): 162–174.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bayoumi, T., D. T. Coe, and E. Helpman (1999). R&D Spillovers and Global Growth. Journal of International Economics 47 (2): 399–428.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bergstrand, J. H. (1985). The Gravity Equation in International Trade: Some Microeocnomic Foundations and Empirical Evidence. Review of Economics and Statistics 67 (3): 474–481.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Blyde, J. S. (2004). Trade and Technology Diffusion in Latin America. International Trade Journal 18 (3): 177–197.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Coe, D., and E. Helpman (1995). International R&D Spillovers. European Economic Review 39 (5): 859–887.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Coe, D. T., E. Helpman, and A. W. Hoffmaister (1997). North-South R&D Spillovers. Economic Journal 107 (January): 134–149.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cohen, W. M., and D. A. Levinthal (1989). Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D. Economic Journal 99 (September): 569–596.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cohen, W. M., and D. A. Levinthal (1990). Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 35 (1): 128–152.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Connolly, M. P. (1997). Technology, Trade and Growth: Some Empirical Findings. Research Paper 9727. Federal Reserve Bank, New York.

  13. Das, G. G. (2000). Embodied Technology Transfer via International Trade: A Quantitative Exploration in a Computable General Equilibrium Framework. Unpublished PhD thesis submitted to the Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Project and Department of Economics, Monash University, Melbourne.

  14. Das, G. G. (2002). Trade, Technology and Human Capital: Stylized Facts and Quantitative Evidence. World Economy 25 (2): 257–281.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Deardorff, A. V. (1997). Determinants of Bilateral Trade: Does Gravity Work in a Classical World. In Jeffrey Frankel (ed.), Regionalization of the World Economy. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

  16. Deardorff, A. V. (2001). Local Comparative Advantage: Trade Costs and the Pattern of Trade. Unpublished manuscript.

  17. De Ferranti, D., D. Lederman, G. Perry, and R. Suescú’n (2003a). Trade for Development in Latin America and the Caribbean. Trade Note, September 10, 2003, World Bank, Washington, D.C.

  18. De Ferranti, D., G. E. Perry, I. S. Gill, J. L. Guasch, W. F. Maloney, C. S. Paramo, and N. Schady (2003b). Closing the Gap in Education and Technology. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.

  19. Dietzenbacher, E. (2000). Spillover of Innovation Effects. Journal of Policy Modeling 22 (1): 27–42.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Dimaranan, B., and R. A. A. Mc Dougall (eds.) (2003). Global Trade, Assistance, and Protection: The GTAP 5 Database. Purdue University: Center for Global Trade Analysis.

  21. Eaton, J., and S. Kortum (1996). Trade in Ideas: Patenting and Productivity in the OECD. Journal of International Economics 40 (3–4): 251–278.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Eaton, J., and S. Kortum (2001). Trade in Capital Goods. European Economic Review 45 (7): 1195–1235.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Eaton, J., and S. Kortum (2002). Technology, Geography, and Trade. Econometrica 70 (5): 1741–1779.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Falvey, R., N. Foster, and D. Greenaway (2004). Imports, Exports, Knowledge Spillovers and Growth. Economics Letters 85 (2): 209–213.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Frankel, J. A. (1997). Regional Trading Blocs in the World Economic System. Washington, D.C.: Institute for International Economics.

  26. Groot, H. L. F. de., G.-J. Linders, P. Rietvelda, and U. Subramanian (2004). The Institutional Determinants of Bilateral Trade Patterns. Kyklos 57 (1): 103–124.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hanson, G. (1994). Localization Economies, Vertical Organization, and Trade. NBER Working Paper 4744. Cambridge, Mass.

  28. Harrison, W. J., and K. R. Pearson (1996). Computing Solutions for Large General Equilibrium Models Using GEMPACK. Computational Economics 9 (2): 83–127.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hertel, T. W. (ed.) (1997). Global Trade Analysis: Modeling and Applications. Cambridge, Mass.: Cambridge University Press.

  30. Itakura, K., and T. W. Hertel (2003). A Note on Changes since GTAP Book Model (Version 2.2a/GTAP 94). Center for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue University.

  31. Kaufmann, D. (2004). Governance Redux: The Empirical Challenge. Global Competitiveness Report 2003–2004: 137–164.

  32. Kaufmann, D., A. Kraay, and M. Mastruzzi (2003). Governance Matters III: Governance Indicators for 1996–2002. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3106. Dataset at: www.worldbank.org/wbi/governance/govdata2002/.

  33. Keller, W. (1997). Trade and the Transmission of Technology. NBER Working Paper 6113. Cambridge, Mass.

  34. Keller, W. (1998). Are International R&D Spillovers Trade Related? Analyzing Spillovers among Randomly Matched Trade Partners. European Economic Review 42 (8): 1469–1481.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Keller, W. (1999). How Trade Patterns and Technology Flows Affect Productivity Growth. NBER Working Paper 6990. Cambridge, Mass.

  36. Keller, W. (2000). Do Trade Patterns and Technology Flows Affect Productivity Growth? World Bank Economic Review 14 (1): 17–47.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Keller, W. (2001). The Geography and Channels of Diffusion at the World’s Technology Frontier. NBER Working Paper 8150. Cambridge, Mass.

  38. Keller, W. (2004). International Technology Diffusion. Journal of Economic Literature 42 (3): 752–782.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Krugman, P. (1991). Geography and Trade. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

  40. Krugman, P. (1995). Development, Geography and Economic Theory. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

  41. Krugman, P., and A. Venables (1995). Globalization and Inequality of Nations. NBER Working Paper 5098. Cambridge, Mass.

  42. Lederman, D., and W. Maloney (2003). Innovation in Mexico: NAFTA is Not Enough. Mimeo, World Bank.

  43. Linnemann, H. (1966). An Econometric Study of International Trade Flows. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

  44. McDougall, R. (2003). Release Notes for GTAP.Tab 6.2. GTAP. Center for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue University.

  45. Meijl, H. van, and F. W. van Tongeren (1998). Trade, Technology Spillovers, and Food Production in China. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv/Review of World Economics 134 (3): 443–449.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Navaretti, G. B., and D. G. Tarr (2000). International Knowledge Flows and Economic Performance: A Review of the Evidence. World Bank Economic Review 14 (1): 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Nelson, R. R. (1990). On Technological Capabilities and their Acquisition. In R. E. Evenson and G. Ranis (eds.), Science and Technology: Lessons for Development Policy. Boulder: Westview Press.

  48. Rauch, J. E. (2001). Business and Social Networks in International Trade. Journal of Economic Literature 39 (4): 1177–1203.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Schiff, M., and Y. Wang (2004). Education, Governance and Trade-Related Technology Diffusion in Latin America. IZA Discussion Paper 1028. Institute for the Study of Labor, Bonn.

  50. Schiff, M., and L. A. Winters (2003). Regional Integration and Development. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.

  51. Sjöholm, F. (1996). International Transfer of Knowledge: The Role of International Trade and Geographic Proximity. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv/Review of World Economics 132 (1): 97–115.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Xu, B., and J. Wang (1999). Capital Goods Trade and R&D Spillovers in the OECD. Canadian Journal of Economics 32 (5): 1258–1274.

    Google Scholar 

  53. OECD (2000). Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard of Indicators. Paris: OECD.

  54. World Bank (1999). Knowledge for Development. World Development Report 1998/9. New York: Oxford University Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gouranga Gopal Das.

Additional information

JEL no.

D58, F13, O33

About this article

Cite this article

Das, G., Andriamananjara, S. Hub-and-Spokes Free Trade Agreements in the Presence of Technology Spillovers: An Application to the Western Hemisphere. Rev. World Econ. 142, 33–66 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10290-006-0056-x

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10290-006-0056-x

Keywords

Navigation