Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

India is emerging as a rapidly growing economy, with many multinational companies expanding globally. Export granularity calls for tailored trade and industrial policies, making it pertinent to study its effects on the comparative advantage and trade balance of India’s manufacturing industries. Calculating the shares of granular firms, employing a nonparametric test, and applying static convergence regression analysis, this study finds that the export share of top manufacturing exporters ranges from 18% to 34%, and granularity in exports is higher than in gross output and factors of production. Export specialization strengthens when top exporters are excluded, while the trade balance worsens. Manufacturing exports are more concentrated in low technology (LT) and high-medium technology (HMT) product groups than in medium-low technology (MLT) product groups, and this concentration increases further when top exporters are excluded. The impact of top exporting firms is stronger in the MLT product group, indicating their key role in shaping the group’s comparative advantage. After excluding the granular firms, the share of industries with comparative advantage increased over time, except for a few years. The findings suggest that trade policy should support ordinary firms in diversifying and strengthening the manufacturing sector’s comparative advantage, particularly in the MLT product group.

JEL Classifications F14, F19

Keywords

Export granularity trade competitiveness export superstars Lafay Revealed Comparative Advantage Index India’s manufacturing sector

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bernard

A. B.

, Eaton

, Jensen

J. B.

, & Kortum

(2003). Plants and productivity in international trade. American Economic Review , 93(4), 1268–1290. https://doi.org/10.1257/000282803769206296

Bernard

A. B.

, Jensen

J. B.

, Redding

S. J.

, & Schott

P. K.

(2018). Global firms. Journal of Economic Literature , 56(2), 565–619. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20160792

Burianová

, & Belová

(2012). The competitiveness of agricultural foreign trade commodities of the CR assessed by way of the Lafay index. Agris On-line Papers in Economics and Informatics (Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management) , 4 (4), 27–36.

Cantwell

(1989). Technological innovation and multinational corporations . B. Blackwell.

Daphne

, & Arshad

(2023, 13 April). U.S. sanctions hit over 120 targets supporting Russia’s invasion of Ukraine [Newspaper Article] . Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/us-imposes-sanctions-over-100-targets-action-over-russias-invasion-ukraine-2023-04-12/

de Lucio

, Mínguez

, Minondo

, & Requena

(2017). The granularity of Spanish exports. SERIEs , 8(3), 225–259. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13209-017-0157-x

de Lucio

, Mínguez

, Minondo

, & Requena

(2023). The importance of the top exporter in regional exports. Investigaciones Regionales – Journal of Regional Research , 57, 137–143.

de Lucio

, Mínguez

, Minondo

, & Requena

(2024). Top exporters and regional export specialization. National Accounting Review , 6(4), 564–572.

Dornbusch

, Fischer

, & Samuelson

P. A.

(1977). Comparative advantage, trade, and payments in a Ricardian model with a continuum of goods. The American Economic Review , 67(5), 823–839. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1828066

10.

Duru

, Hayran

, & Gül

(2022). The analysis of the competitiveness of Mediterranean countries in the world citrus trade. Mediterranean Agricultural Sciences , 35(1), 21–26. https://doi.org/10.29136/mediterranean.1012466

11.

Eaton

, Kortum

, & Kramarz

(2011). An anatomy of international trade: Evidence from French firms. Econometrica , 79(5), 1453–1498. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA8318

12.

Freund

, & Pierola

M. D.

(2015). Export superstars. The Review of Economics and Statistics , 97(5), 1023–1032. https://doi.org/10.1162/REST_a_00511

13.

Freund

, & Pierola

M. D.

(2016). The origins and dynamics of export superstars [Working Paper No. 16-11, pp. 1–28]. Peterson Institute for International Economics. https://publications.iadb.org/publications/english/document/The-Origins-and-Dynamics-of-Export-Superstars.pdf

14.

Gaubert

, & Itskhoki

(2021). Granular comparative advantage. Journal of Political Economy , 129(3), 871–939. https://doi.org/10.1086/712444

15.

Gaubert

, Itskhoki

, & Vogler

(2021). Government policies in a granular global economy. Journal of Monetary Economics , 121, 95–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2021.04.003

16.

Görg

, & Mulyukova

(2024). Place-based policies and firm performance: Evidence from special economic zones in India. European Economic Review , 165, 104752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2024.104752

17.

Han

(2023). Structural reform, technological progress and total factor productivity in manufacturing. Sustainability , 15(1), 432. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010432

18.

Hassani

, & Chandran

(2025). Firm heterogeneity and India’s manufacturing exports: Lessons on protection and trade theory. The International Trade Journal , 39(4), 396–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/08853908.2024.2410430

19.

Hussain

M. A.

, & Tyagi

(2024). Politically connected firms and access to credit: Evidence from India. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics , 69, 527–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2024.03.006

20.

Konstantakopoulou

, & Tsionas

M. G.

(2019). Measuring comparative advantages in the euro area. Economic Modelling , 76, 260–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2018.08.005

21.

Marconi

, & Rolli

(2007). Comparative advantage patterns and domestic determinants in emerging countries: An analysis with a focus on technology [Temi di Discussione Working Paper No. 638, pp. 1–49]. Bank of Italy. https://www.bancaditalia.it/pubblicazioni/temi-discussione/2007/2007-0638/index.html

22.

Marin

, Schymik

, & Tscheke

(2015). Europe’s exports superstar: It’s the organisation! [Bruegel Working Paper No. 2015/05, pp. 39]. Brussels. https://www.bruegel.org/system/files/wp_attachments/Europe_-export_superstar.pdf

23.

Melitz

M. J.

(2003). The impact of trade on intra-industry reallocations and aggregate industry productivity. Econometrica , 71(6), 1695–1725. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0262.00467

24.

Melitz

M. J.

, & Ottaviano

G. I. P.

(2008). Market size, trade, and productivity. The Review of Economic Studies , 75(1), 295–316. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-937X.2007.00463.x

25.

Osgood

, Tingley

, Bernauer

, Kim

I. S.

, Milner

H. V.

, & Spilker

(2017). The charmed life of superstar exporters: Survey evidence on firms and trade policy. The Journal of Politics , 79(1), 133–152. https://doi.org/10.1086/687207

26.

Rijesh

(2020). Structural changes in the Indian organised manufacturing sector [ISID Working Paper No. 225]. Institute for Studies in Industrial Development, New Delhi. https://isid.org.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/200120_Rijesh.pdf

27.

Rowley

T. M.

(2025). Domestic vs foreign superstars: Comparative advantage and productivity spillovers. Review of World Economics , 161(3), 869–909. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10290-024-00570-4

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.41 MB

0.00 MB

Export Granularity and How It Shapes Comparative Advantage and Trade Balance in Indian Manufacturing

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material