Politická ekonomie
Politická ekonomie
Prague Economic Papers
University of Economics, Prague

Prague Economic Papers Vol. 27 No. 2

Disappearing Borders in the Visegrad Countries

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18267/j.pep.635

[full text (PDF)]

Adam Markus

The aim of this paper is to evaluate the trade integration process of the Visegrad countries from a special point of view, namely by estimating border effects in the countries. The regressional analysis run with two different estimators (OLS vs. PPML) on two different model specifications suggests that between 1995 and 2011 the V4 countries were integrating continuously into the Single Market of the European Union. The results also show that the size of border effect is fairly sensitive to the estimator and particularly to the specification chosen by the researcher. According to the country-level estimation, Hungary seems to be the most integrated country getting the lowest home bias parameters followed by the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Poland, respectively.

Keywords: border effect, gravity model, market integration, PPML, Visegrad countries

JEL Classification: F14, F15


Anderson, J. E. (1979). A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation. The American Economic Review, 69(1), 106–116.

Anderson, J. E., van Wincoop, E. (2003). Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to

the Border Puzzle. The American Economic Review, 93(1), 170–192,


Andresen, M. A. (2010). The Geography of the Canada-United States Border Effect. Regional

Studies, 44(5), 579–594, https://doi.org/10.1080/00343400802508794

Baldwin, R., Taglioni, D. (2006). Gravity for Dummies and Dummies for Gravity Equations.

National Bureau of Economic Research. Cambridge Working Paper No. 12516,


Balta, N., Delgado, J. (2009). Home Bias and Market Integration in the EU. CESifo Economic

Studies, 55(1), 110–144. https://doi.org/10.1093/cesifo/ifn037

Baier, S. L., Bergstrand, J. H. (2009). Bonus Vetus OLS: A Simple Method for

Approximating International Trade-Cost Effects Using the Gravity Equation. Journal

of International Economics, 77(1), 77–85, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2008.10.004

Békés, G., Kleinert, J., Toubal, F. (2009). Spillovers from Multinationals to Heterogeneous Domestic Firms: Evidence from Hungary. The World Economy, 32(10), 1408–1433, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9701.2009.01179.x

Bergstrand, J. H. (1985). The Gravity Equation in International Trade: Some Microeconomic

Foundations and Empirical Evidence. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 67(3),

474–481, https://doi.org/10.2307/1925976

Bergstrand, J. H. (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, https://doi.org/10.2307/1928061

Bosco, M. G. (2001). Does FDI Contribute to Technological Spillovers and Growth? A Panel Data Analysis of Hungarian Firms. Transnational Corporations, 10(1), 43–68.

Chen, N. (2004). Intra-national versus International Trade in the European Union: Why

do National Borders Matter? Journal of International Economics, 63(1), 93–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1996(03)00042-4

Cheng, I-H., Wall, H. J. (2005). Controlling for Heterogeneity in Gravity Models of Trade and Integration. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review, 87(1), 49–64, https://doi.org/10.3886/icpsr01313.v1

Cheptea, A. (2010). Border Effects and East-West Integration. Smart Lereco Working Paper

No. 10–15, 1–26.

Coughlin, C. C., Novy, D. (2013). Is the International Border Effect Larger than the Domestic Border Effect? Evidence from U. S. Trade. CESifo Economic Studies, 59(2), 249–276, https://doi.org/10.1093/cesifo/ifs002

Deardorff, A.V. (1998). Determinants of Bilateral Trade. Does Gravity Work in a Neoclassical World? In: The Regionalization of the World Economy. Chicago, University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-25995-1, pp. 7–32.

Eaton, J., Kortum, S. (2002). Technology, Geography and Trade. Econometrica, 70(5), 1741–1779, https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0262.00352

Feenstra, R. C. (2002). Border Effects and the Gravity Equation: Consistent Methods

for Estimation. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 49(5), 491–506,


Gil-Pareja, S., Martínez-Serrano, J.A., Llorca-Vivero, R., Oliver-Alonso, J. (2005).

The Border Effect in Spain. The World Economy, 28(11), 1617–1631,


Head, K., Mayer, T. (2000). Non-Europe: The Magnitude and Causes of Market

Fragmentation in Europe. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 136(2), 285–314,


Head, K., Mayer, T. (2002). Illusory Border Effects: Distance Mismeasurement Inflates Estimates of Home Bias in Trade. Centre d’Etudes Prospectives et d’Informations Internationales (CEPII), Paris Working Paper No. 2002-01.

Helliwell, J. F. (1998). How Much Do National Borders Matter? Washington, DC: Brookings

Institution Press. ISBN 9780815735540.

Hilberry, R., Hummels, D. (2003). Intranational Home Bias: Some Explanations.

The Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(4), 1089–1092,


Horváth, J., Rátfai, A., Döme, B. (2008). The Border Effect in Small Open Economies. Economic Systems, 32(1), 33–45, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecosys.2007.07.001

Krugman, P. (1980). Scale Economies, Product Differentiation and the Pattern of Trade.

The American Economic Review, 70(5), 950–959.

Llano-Verduras, C., Minondo, A., Requena-Silvente, F. (2011). Is the Border Effect an Artefact of Geographical Aggregation? The World Economy, 34(10), 1171–1187.


Mátyás, L. (1997). Proper Econometric Specification of the Gravity Model. The World Economy, 20(3), 363–368, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9701.00074

McCallum, J. (1995). National Borders Matter: Canada-U.S. Regional Trade Patterns.

The American Economic Review, 85(3), 615–623.

Milimet, D. L., Osang, T. (2007). Do State Borders Matter for U.S. Intra-national Trade? The Role of History and Internal Migration. Canadian Journal of Economics, 40(1), 93–126, https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.00401.x

Nitsch, V. (2000). National Borders and International Trade: Evidence from the European Union. Canadian Journal of Economics, 33(4), 1091–1105,


Obstfeld, M., Rogoff, K. (2001). The Six Major Puzzles in International Macroeconomics: Is There a Common Cause? NBER Macroeconomics Annual, 15, Cambridge: MIT press, 339–412,


Pacchioli, C. (2011). Is the EU Internal Market Suffering from an Integration Deficit? Estimating the ‘Home-bias Effect’. CEPS Working Document No. 348, May 2011, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1898602

Pásztor, Sz. (2014). The Economic Transformation of Borders in Central and Eastern Europe: The Case of Hungary and Its Eastern Borders. PhD dissertation, University of Debrecen, Debrecen. Retrieved: https://dea.lib.unideb.hu/dea/handle/2437/182110

Pöyhönen, P. (1963). A Tentative Model for the Volume of Trade between Countries.

Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 90(1), 93–99.

Rose, A. K., van Wincoop, E. (2001). National Money as a Barrier to International Trade: The Real Case for Monetary Union, American Economic Review, 91(2), 386–390,


Samuelson, P. A. (1954). The Transfer Problem and Transport Costs, II: Analysis of Effects of Trade Impediments. The Economic Journal, 64(254), 264–289, https://doi.org/10.2307/2226834

Santos Silva, J. M. C, Tenreyro, S. (2006). The Log of Gravity. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 88(4), 641–658, https://doi.org/10.1162/rest.88.4.641

Tinbergen, J. (1962). Shaping the World Economy – Suggestions for an International Economic Policy. New York: Twentieth Century Fund.

Tóth, I. J. (1998). Market Links and Growth Capability of Enterprises in a Transforming

Economy: The Case of Hungary, in: Csaba, L., ed., The Hungarion SME Sector Development

in Comparative Perspective. Budapest: KOPINT-DATORG Foundation and CIPE/USAID, 29–60.

Wei, S-J. (1996). Intra-national versus International Trade: How Stubborn Are Nations in Global Integration? National Bureau of Economic Research. Cambridge Working Paper No. 5531, https://doi.org/10.3386/w5531

Wolf, H. C. (2000). Intranational Home Bias in Trade. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 82(4), 555–563, https://doi.org/10.1162/003465300559046