Trade Facilitation,Diversity and Intra-Regional Exportability: A Study of Small Island Economies in the Caribbean and the South Pacific

Abstract

Despite the contentious success of the trade agreements, the island countries have still been vehemently negotiating further trade deals. This study explores the element which enhances trade flows for selected Commonwealth countries in the Caribbean and Pacific regions. The results suggest that income (gross domestic product) growth as significant support for trade flows, regional trade integrations of the Pacific and Caribbean are explained in its quiet dynamism, worth strengthening and further reforming. This study, by means of a comparative investigation of selected countries from within the Pacific and the Caribbean regions, proposes that the strategy for enhancing trade integration is creating demand for diversification in the region through greater regional integration. The estimates demonstrate that the level of diversification positively impacted the regions’ bilateral export, having the Pacific region influenced almost twice as much like the Caribbean. Moreover, whilst understanding that the geographical location of the Caribbean already lets its states thrive through lower trading costs as compared to the Pacific, analysis in the study shows that the distance, remoteness and logistics difficulties inflate the price (or trade costs) limiting the success of regional trade agreements.

JEL Classification: F13, F15

Keywords

Pacific Caribbean trade diversification gravity model trade flow

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderson

, & Marcouiller

(2002). Insecurity and the pattern of trade: An empirical investigation. Review of Economics and Statistics , 84, 342–352.

Anderson

, & Wincoop

(2004). Trade costs. Journal of Economic Literature , 42, 691–751.

Bernard

, Jensen

J. B.

, Redding

, & Schott

(2007). Firms in international trade. Journal of Economic Perspectives , 21(3), 105–130.

Bernard

, Jensen

J. B.

, Redding

, & Schott

(2012). The empirics of firm heterogeneity and international trade. Centre for Economic Studies.

Cairncross

(1997). The death of distance: How the communications revolution will change our lives. Orion Publishing.

Coulibaly

, & Fontagne

(2005). South – South trade: Geography matters. Journal of African Economies , 15(2), 313–341.

Deardorff

(2004). Local comparative advantage: Trade costs and the pattern of trade (Research Seminar in International Economics Discussion Paper No. 500). University of Michigan.

Demas

(1965). The economics of development in small countries with special reference to the Caribbean. McGill Press.

Disdier

, & Head

(2008). The puzzling persistence of the distance effect on bilateral trade. Review of Economics and Statistics , 90, 37–48.

10.

Feenstra

(2004). Advanced international trade: Theory and evidence. Princeton University Press.

11.

Francois

J. F.

, & Manchin

(2007). Institutions, infrastructure and trade (Centro Studi Luca d’AglianoDevelopment Studies Working Paper No. 224). World Trade Organization. http://ssrn.com/abstract=964209

12.

Friedman

(2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

13.

Guiso

, Sapienza

, & Zingales

(2009). Cultural biases in economic exchange? Quarterly Journal of Economics , 124, 1095–1131.

14.

International Monetary Fund. (2013). Direction of Trade Statistics [CD-ROM] Washington DC 20431, USA: IMF

15.

Leamer

, & Levinsohn

(1995). International trade theory: The evidence. In Gene M. Grossman and Kenneth Rogoff (Eds.), Handbook of international economics, Vol. 3, pp 1339–1394. Elsevier Science B. V.

16.

Linders

, Slangen

, de Groot

, & Beugelsdijk

(2005). Cultural and institutional determinants of bilateral trade (Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper no. 2005-074/3). Rotterdam.

17.

Maiti

(2014). Trade relations of China and India with Mekong region. In De

(ed.) ASEAN-India Deepening economic partnership in Mekong region. RIS, New Delhi.

18.

Melitz

(2003). The impact of trade on intra-industry reallocations and aggregate industry productivity. Econometrica , 71(6), 1695–1725.

19.

MFAT. (1996). Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (New Zealand), the South Pacific Forum: Regional Cooperation at Work (Information Bulletin No. 56). Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

20.

Morgan

(2015). Negotiating power in contemporary pacific trade diplomacy. In: Grey

& Tarte

(eds.) The New Pacific Diplomacy. ANU Press.

21.

Morgan

(2016). Regional political cooperation to enhance mobility. [Online] 16th August 2016. DevPolicy Blog, Development Policy Centre. Available from: http://devpolicy.org/regional-political-cooperation-enhance-mobility-20160816/

22.

Novy

(2008). Gravity redux: Measuring international trade costs with panel data. University of Warwick, NBER.

23.

Payne

, & Sutton

(2001). Charting Caribbean development. University Press of Florida.

24.

Rolfe

(2007). Many small states, two regions, different constructions. JSTOR [Online], 56(3), 96–134.

25.

Sutton

, & Payne

(1993). Lilliput under threat: The security problems of small island and enclave developing states. Political Studies, XLI, 579–593.

26.

UN ESCAP. (2007). ARTNet. Trade statistics in policymaking – A handbook of commonly used trade indices and indicators [Online]. United Nations Publishers.

27.

World Trade Report. (2013). Factors shaping the future of world trade. World Trade Organization. Cambridge University Press, 13(4), 733–735.

28.

Warner

, & Anatol

(2014). Caribbean Integration-Lessons for the Pacific? Asia & The Pacific Policy Studies, 2(1), 183–196.

29.

Winters

& Martins

(2004). When comparative advantage is not enough: Business costs in small remote economies. Development Research Group World Bank. Centre for Economic Policy Research, London.