The Experts below are selected from a list of 360 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Jeffrey G Williamson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
did muhammad ali foster industrialization in early nineteenth century egypt
The Economic History Review, 2015Co-Authors: Laura Panza, Jeffrey G WilliamsonAbstract:Muhammad Ali, who ruled Egypt between 1805 and 1849, intervened in Egyptian markets in an attempt to foster industrialization, especially between 1812 and 1840. Like a modern marketing board, the state purchased agricultural commodities (cotton and wheat) at low prices and sold them on world markets at much higher prices, a policy equivalent to an export tax. Ali also replaced tax farming with his own land taxes. The revenues so derived were used in part to finance manufacturing investment and to build irrigation canals. In addition, Ali supplied flax and cotton at those cheap purchase prices to domestic textile manufacturing, thus subsidizing the industry. He also used Non-Tariff Barriers to exclude foreign competition from domestic markets. Were Ali's state-led policies successful in fostering industry? The answer is no easier to extract from this phase of Egyptian history than from that of other poor countries at that time. This is because Egypt faced the same terms of trade boom typical of most poor commodity exporters, which was causing de-industrialization everywhere else in the poor periphery. Ali picked a very difficult time to pursue his agenda, but we show that his policies were successful.
-
did muhammad ali foster industrialization in early nineteenth century egypt
The Economic History Review, 2015Co-Authors: Laura Panza, Jeffrey G WilliamsonAbstract:type="main"> Muhammad Ali, who ruled Egypt between 1805 and 1849, intervened in Egyptian markets in an attempt to foster industrialization, especially between 1812 and 1840. Like a modern marketing board, the state purchased agricultural commodities (cotton and wheat) at low prices and sold them on world markets at much higher prices, a policy equivalent to an export tax. Ali also replaced tax farming with his own land taxes. The revenues so derived were used in part to finance manufacturing investment and to build irrigation canals. In addition, Ali supplied flax and cotton at those cheap purchase prices to domestic textile manufacturing, thus subsidizing the industry. He also used Non-Tariff Barriers to exclude foreign competition from domestic markets. Were Ali's state-led policies successful in fostering industry? The answer is no easier to extract from this phase of Egyptian history than from that of other poor countries at that time. This is because Egypt faced the same terms of trade boom typical of most poor commodity exporters, which was causing de-industrialization everywhere else in the poor periphery. Ali picked a very difficult time to pursue his agenda, but we show that his policies were successful.
Laura Panza - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
did muhammad ali foster industrialization in early nineteenth century egypt
The Economic History Review, 2015Co-Authors: Laura Panza, Jeffrey G WilliamsonAbstract:Muhammad Ali, who ruled Egypt between 1805 and 1849, intervened in Egyptian markets in an attempt to foster industrialization, especially between 1812 and 1840. Like a modern marketing board, the state purchased agricultural commodities (cotton and wheat) at low prices and sold them on world markets at much higher prices, a policy equivalent to an export tax. Ali also replaced tax farming with his own land taxes. The revenues so derived were used in part to finance manufacturing investment and to build irrigation canals. In addition, Ali supplied flax and cotton at those cheap purchase prices to domestic textile manufacturing, thus subsidizing the industry. He also used Non-Tariff Barriers to exclude foreign competition from domestic markets. Were Ali's state-led policies successful in fostering industry? The answer is no easier to extract from this phase of Egyptian history than from that of other poor countries at that time. This is because Egypt faced the same terms of trade boom typical of most poor commodity exporters, which was causing de-industrialization everywhere else in the poor periphery. Ali picked a very difficult time to pursue his agenda, but we show that his policies were successful.
-
did muhammad ali foster industrialization in early nineteenth century egypt
The Economic History Review, 2015Co-Authors: Laura Panza, Jeffrey G WilliamsonAbstract:type="main"> Muhammad Ali, who ruled Egypt between 1805 and 1849, intervened in Egyptian markets in an attempt to foster industrialization, especially between 1812 and 1840. Like a modern marketing board, the state purchased agricultural commodities (cotton and wheat) at low prices and sold them on world markets at much higher prices, a policy equivalent to an export tax. Ali also replaced tax farming with his own land taxes. The revenues so derived were used in part to finance manufacturing investment and to build irrigation canals. In addition, Ali supplied flax and cotton at those cheap purchase prices to domestic textile manufacturing, thus subsidizing the industry. He also used Non-Tariff Barriers to exclude foreign competition from domestic markets. Were Ali's state-led policies successful in fostering industry? The answer is no easier to extract from this phase of Egyptian history than from that of other poor countries at that time. This is because Egypt faced the same terms of trade boom typical of most poor commodity exporters, which was causing de-industrialization everywhere else in the poor periphery. Ali picked a very difficult time to pursue his agenda, but we show that his policies were successful.
Jan In T Veld - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the economic benefits of the eu single market in goods and services
Journal of Policy Modeling, 2019Co-Authors: Jan In T VeldAbstract:Abstract This paper examines the macro-economic benefits of the Single Market in goods and services by simulating a counterfactual scenario in which tariffs and Non-Tariff Barriers are reintroduced. In this counterfactual scenario, intra-EU trade flows are significantly reduced. Lower trade openness also means reduced market size and less competition. Using empirical evidence on the effect of the Single Market on firms’ mark-ups over marginal costs, we add these competition effects and arrive at a total estimate of around 9% higher GDP on average for the EU, but with a strong degree of heterogeneity across EU countries.
-
quantifying the economic effects of the single market in a structural macromodel
Social Science Research Network, 2019Co-Authors: Jan In T VeldAbstract:This paper examines the macro-economic benefits of the Single Market in goods and services by simulating a counterfactual scenario in which tariffs and Non-Tariff Barriers are reintroduced. Model simulations show how the reintroduction of trade Barriers in such a counterfactual would lead to significantly lower trade flows between the Member States. Lower trade openness also means reduced market size and less competition. Using empirical evidence on the effect of the Single Market on firms’ mark-ups over marginal costs, we add these effects to the direct trade effects to come to a total estimate of the economic benefits of the Single Market of between 8% and 9% higher GDP on average for the EU.
Natalie Chen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
intra national versus international trade in the european union why do national borders matter
Journal of International Economics, 2004Co-Authors: Natalie ChenAbstract:Based on the estimation of a theoretically consistent gravity equation, together with a careful computation of transportation costs across countries and industries, the Paper first provides estimates of ‘border effects’ among EU countries. The second objective is to examine the reasons for border effects. Contrarily to the previous findings reported in the literature, we show that national trade Barriers do provide an explanation. In particular, technical Barriers to trade, together with firm and product-specific information costs, increase border effects, whereas Non-Tariff Barriers are not significant. Our results however suggest that these Barriers are not the only cause since the spatial clustering of firms is also shown to matter.
-
intra national versus international trade in the european union why do national borders matter
Journal of International Economics, 2004Co-Authors: Natalie ChenAbstract:The first objective of this paper is to estimate border effects among European Union countries. In this context, the specification of the gravity equation, together with the choice of the distance measure, are shown to be crucial for assessing the size of the border effect. The second objective is to evaluate the determinants of the cross-commodity variation in national border effects. Contrary to previous findings reported in the literature, we show that trade Barriers do provide an explanation. In particular, technical Barriers to trade, together with product-specific information costs, increase border effects, whereas Non-Tariff Barriers are not significant. Our results further suggest that these Barriers are not the only cause since the spatial clustering of firms is also found to matter.
Dani Rodrik - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
trade policy and economic growth a skeptic s guide to the cross national evidence
Nber Macroeconomics Annual, 2000Co-Authors: Francisco Rodriguez, Dani RodrikAbstract:Do countries with lower policy-induced Barriers to international trade grow faster, once other relevant country characteristics are controlled for? There exists a large empirical literature providing an affirmative answer to this question. We argue that methodological problems with the empirical strategies employed in this literature leave the results open to diverse interpretations. In many cases, the indicators of "openness" used by researchers are poor measures of trade Barriers or are highly correlated with other sources of bad economic performance. In other cases, the methods used to ascertain the link between trade policy and growth have serious shortcomings. Papers that we review include Dollar (1992), Ben-David (1993), Sachs and Warner (1995), and Edwards (1998). We find little evidence that open trade policies--in the sense of lower tariff and Non-Tariff Barriers to trade--are significantly associated with economic growth.
-
trade policy and economic growth a skeptic s guide to cross national evidence
National Bureau of Economic Research, 1999Co-Authors: Francisco Rodriguez, Dani RodrikAbstract:Do countries with lower policy-induced Barriers to international trade grow faster, once other relevant country characteristics are controlled for? There exists a large empirical literature providing an affirmative answer to this question. We argue that methodological problems with the empirical strategies employed in this literature leave the results open to diverse interpretations. In many cases, the indicators of openness' used by researchers are poor measures of trade Barriers or are highly correlated with other sources of bad economic performance. In other cases, the methods used to ascertain the link between trade policy and growth have serious shortcomings. Papers that we review include Dollar (1992), Ben-David (1993), Sachs and Warner (1995), and Edwards (1998). We find little evidence that open trade policies--in the sense of lower tariff and Non-Tariff Barriers to trade--are significantly associated with economic growth.
