Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

NONHOMOTHETICITY AND BILATERAL TRADE: EVIDENCE AND A QUANTITATIVE EXPLANATION

Ana Cecília Fieler
Econometrica
Vol. 79, No. 4 (July, 2011), pp. 1069-1101
Published by: The Econometric Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41237856
Page Count: 33
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Download ($10.00)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
NONHOMOTHETICITY AND BILATERAL TRADE: EVIDENCE AND A QUANTITATIVE EXPLANATION
Preview not available

Abstract

The standard gravity model predicts that trade flows increase in proportion to importer and exporter total income, regardless of how income is divided into income per capita and population. Bilateral trade data, however, show that trade grows strongly with income per capita and is largely unresponsive to population. I develop a general equilibrium Ricardian model of trade that allows the elasticity of trade with respect to income per capita and with respect to population to diverge. Goods are of various types, which differ in their income elasticity of demand and in the extent to which there is heterogeneity in their production technologies. I estimate the model using bilateral trade data of 162 countries and compare it to a special case that delivers the gravity equation. The general model improves the restricted model's predictions regarding variations in trade due to size and income. I experiment with counterfactuals. A positive technology shock in China makes poor and rich countries better off and middle-income countries worse off.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
[1069]
    [1069]
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1070
    1070
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1071
    1071
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1072
    1072
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1073
    1073
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1074
    1074
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1075
    1075
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1076
    1076
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1077
    1077
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1078
    1078
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1079
    1079
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1080
    1080
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1081
    1081
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1082
    1082
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1083
    1083
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1084
    1084
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1085
    1085
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1086
    1086
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1087
    1087
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1088
    1088
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1089
    1089
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1090
    1090
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1091
    1091
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1092
    1092
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1093
    1093
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1094
    1094
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1095
    1095
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1096
    1096
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1097
    1097
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1098
    1098
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1099
    1099
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1100
    1100
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1101
    1101