Classical or Gravity? Which Trade Model Best Matches the UK Facts?

被引:0
作者
Patrick Minford
Yongdeng Xu
机构
[1] Cardiff University,Cardiff Business School
[2] CEPR,undefined
[3] Centre for Economic Policy Research,undefined
来源
Open Economies Review | 2018年 / 29卷
关键词
Bootstrap; Indirect inference; Gravity model; Classical trade model; UK trade; F10-14; F16-17;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
We examine the empirical evidence bearing on whether UK trade is governed by a Classical model or by a Gravity model, using annual data from 1965 to 2015 and the method of Indirect Inference which has very large power in this application. The Gravity model here differs from the Classical model in assuming imperfect competition and a positive effect of total trade on productivity. We found that the Classical model passed the test comfortably, and that the Gravity model also passed it but at a rather lower level of probability, though as the test power was raised it was rejected. The two models’ policy implications are similar.
引用
收藏
页码:579 / 611
页数:32
相关论文
共 10 条
  • [1] Le VPM(2011)How much nominal rigidity is there in the US economy? Testing a New Keynesian DSGE Model using indirect inference J. Econ Dyn Control 35 2078-2104
  • [2] Meenagh D(1997)Trade, Technology and Labour Markets in the World Economy, 1970–90: a computable general equilibrium analysis J Dev Stud 34 1-34
  • [3] Minford P(1955)Factor endowment and relative commodity prices Economica 22 336-341
  • [4] Wickens M(1941)Protection and real wages Rev Econ Stud 9 58-73
  • [5] Minford P(undefined)undefined undefined undefined undefined-undefined
  • [6] Nowell E(undefined)undefined undefined undefined undefined-undefined
  • [7] Riley J(undefined)undefined undefined undefined undefined-undefined
  • [8] Rybczynski TM(undefined)undefined undefined undefined undefined-undefined
  • [9] Stolper WF(undefined)undefined undefined undefined undefined-undefined
  • [10] Samuelson PA(undefined)undefined undefined undefined undefined-undefined