The high contribution of India’s exports to its gross domestic product underscores the vulnerability of macroeconomic shocks like the COVID-19 in terms of losses in export revenues, increased cost of import and slowdown in growth. The scale of impact also depends on the degree of trade concentration, geographical expansion, export potential and strategic relationship of a country with its trading partners. This article aims to examine these factors using the modern gravity model approach. It also intends to analyse the export intensity and export potential of India with its 25 major trading partners. The results are estimated by using the Poisson pseudo-maximum likelihood method for the period 1991–2020. The results show that the exports between two nations are remarkably impacted by the trade cost and combined economic size. Furthermore, variables like population and islands are introduced in the extended gravity model, which positively impacts India’s exports. The direction of India’s exports witnessed a reversal in trend towards the traditional export destinations in 2020 compared to emerging countries from 2010 onwards. The export potential index also explains that India has the scope to enhance the export potential with developed nations as advocated by the Heckscher–Ohlin model.
AndersonJ. E. (1979). A theoretical foundations for the gravity equation. American Economic Review, 69(1), 106–116.
2.
AndersonJ. E. (2011). The gravity model. Annual Review of Economics, 3(1), 133–160.
3.
AndersonJ. E., & van-WincoopE. (2003). Gravity with gravitas: A solution to the border puzzle. American Economic Review, 93(1), 170–192.
4.
Asian Development Bank. (2007). Export dynamics in East Asia. In Asian development outlook 2007 update (pp. 53–86). https://www.adb.org/publications/asian-development-outlook-2007-update
5.
Asian Regional Integration Center. (2021). Asian regional database. Free trade agreements database. Retrieved September 2021, fromhttps://aric.adb.org/database/fta
6.
BaltagiB. H., EggerP., & PfaffermayrM. (2003). A generalized design for bilateral trade flow models. Economics Letters, 80, 391–397.
7.
BergstrandJ. H. (1985). The gravity equation of trade, some macroeconomic foundations and emperical evidence. The Review of Economic and Statistics, 67, 474–481.
8.
BergstrandJ. (1989). The generalized gravity equation, monopolistic competition, and the factor-proportions theory in international trade. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 71(1), 143–153.
9.
BinhD. T. T., DuongN. V., & CuongH. M. (2013). Applying gravity model to analyse trade activities of Vietnam. Forum for Research in Emperical International Trade, 1–24.
10.
DeardorffA. (1998). Determinants of bilateral trade: Does gravity work in a neoclassical world? In The regionalization of the world economy (pp. 7–32). National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
11.
Dell’AricciaG. (1999). Exchange rate fluctuations and trade flows: Evidence from the European Union. IMF Staff Papers, 46(3), 1–5.
12.
Economic Survey of India. (2020). Economic survey of India 2019–2020. Government of India.
13.
EggerP. (1999). A note on the proper econometric specification of the gravity equation [Working Papers No. 108, pp. 1–10]. Austrian Institute of Economic Research (WIFO).
14.
EndohM. (1999). Trade creation and trade diversion in the EEC, the LAFTA and the CMEA: 1960–1994. Applied Economics, 31(2),207–216.
15.
EvenettS. J., & KellerW. (1994). On theories explaining the success of the gravity equation. Journal of Political Economy, 110, 281–316.
16.
FeenstraR.C. (2004). Advanced international trade: Theory and evidence. Princeton University Press.
17.
FeenstraR. C., MarkusenJ. R., & RoseA. K. (2001). Using the gravity equation to differentiate among alternative theories of trade. The Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d’Economique, 34(2), 430–447. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3131862
18.
FukaoK., OkuboT., & SternR. M. (2003). An econometric analysis of trade diversion under NAFTA. North American Journal of Finance and Economics, 14(1), 3–24.
19.
GilbertJ., & MikicM.UN.ESCAP. (2009). Trade statistics in policymaking: A handbook of commonly used trade indices and indicators. UNESCAP.
20.
GreenawayD., & MilnerC. (2002). Regionalism and gravity. Scottish Journal of Political Economy49(5), 574–585.
21.
GujaratiD. N. (2003). Basic econometrics (4th ed.). The McGraw-Hill.
22.
HeadKeith, & MayerThierry. (2014). Gravity Equations: Workhorse,Toolkit, and Cookbook. Handbook of International Economics, 1(4), 131–195.
23.
HelpmanE. (1987). Imperfect competition and international trade: Evidence from fourteen industrial countries. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 1(1), 62–81.
24.
HelpmanE., & KrugmanP. (1985). Market structure and foreign trade: Increasing returns, imperfect competition, and the international economy. MIT Press.
25.
HelpmanE., MelitzM., & RubinsteinY. (2008). Estimating trade flows: Trading partners and trading volumes. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 123(2), 441–478.
26.
HendersonD. J., & MillimetD. L. (2008). Is gravity linear?Journal of Applied Econometrics, 23(2), 137–172.
27.
JosephT. (2016). An analytical enquiry into the import intensity of Indian manufacturing sector. The Indian Economic Journal, 64(1–4), 43–56.
28.
KrugmanP. (1980). Scale economies, product differentiation, and the pattern of trade. American Economic Review, 70(5), 950–959.
29.
KunstE. N., & RobertM. (2013). Competing specifications of the gravity equation: A three-way model, bilateral interaction effects, or a dynamic gravity model with time-varying country effects?Empirical Economics, 46, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-013-0696-3
30.
LinnemannH. (1966). An econometric study of international trade flows. Holland Publishing.
31.
LohaniK. K. (2020). Trade flow of India with BRICS countries: A gravity model approach. Global Business Review, 1–18.
32.
MayerT., & ZignagoS. (2011). Notes on CEPII’s distance measures: The GeoDist database [Working Paper No 2011-25, pp. 1–12]. CEPII.
33.
Ministry of Commerce and Industry. (2021). Databse on trade agreements. Retrieved September 2021, fromhttps://commerce.gov.in/international-trade/trade-agreements/
34.
MusilaJ. W. (2005). The intensity of trade creation and trade diversion in COMESA, ECCAS and ECOWAS: A comparative analysis. Journal of African Economies, 14(1), 117–141. https://doi.org/10.1093/jae/ejh039
35.
NurogluE. (2010). The impact of population on bilateral trade flows in the case of OIC. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261000595_The_Impact_of_Population_on_Bilateral_Trade_Flows_in_the_case_of_OIC
36.
Panagariya. (2008). India: The Emerging Giant. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oxp:obooks:9780195315035
37.
PöyhönenP. (1963). A tentative model for the volume of trade between countries. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 90, 93–100. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40436776
38.
RobertB., FelixB., JaredG., WayneC., & PaulG. (2015). Exploring the links between bilateral and regional trade agreements and merchandise trade. Asian and Pacific Policy Studies, 2(3), 467–484.
39.
SarkerR., & JayasingheS. (2007). Regional trade agreements and trade in agri-food products: Evidence for the European Union from gravity modeling using disaggregated data. The Journal of the International Association of Agricultural Economists, 37(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2007.00227.x
40.
SilvaJ. M. C. S., & TenreyroS. (2006). The log of gravity. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 88(4), 641–658. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest.88.4.641
41.
TangD. (2005). Effects of the regional trading arrangements on trade: Evidence from the NAFTA, ANZCER and ASEAN Countries, 1989–2000. Journal of International Trade Economics Development, 14(2), 241–265.
VeeramaniC. (2012). Anatomy of India’s merchandise export growth, 1993–94 to 2010–11. Economic & Political Weekly, 47(1), 94–104.
44.
World Bank. (2021). World development indicators. World Bank DataBase, world bank. Retrieved November 2021, fromhttps://databank.worldbank.org/home.aspx
45.
World Integrated Trade Solution. (2020). World integrated trade solution database. Retrieved November 2021, fromhttps://wits.worldbank.org/
46.
World Population Review. (2021). Island countries 2021. Retrieved December 2021, fromhttps://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/island-countries
47.
YangS., & Martínez-ZarzosoI. (2014). A panel data analysis of trade creation and trade diversion effects: The case of ASEAN–China free trade area. China Economic Review, 29(C), 1–43.
