Prague Economic Papers 2018, 27(2):149-168 | DOI: 10.18267/j.pep.635

Disappearing Borders in the Visegrad Countries

Ádám Márkus
Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary

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, Visegrad countries, gravity model, market integration, PPML
JEL classification: F14, F15

Published: April 1, 2018  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Márkus, Á. (2018). Disappearing Borders in the Visegrad Countries. Prague Economic Papers, 27(2), 149-168. doi: 10.18267/j.pep.635
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Anderson, J. E. (1979). A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation. The American Economic Review, 69(1), 106-116.
    2. Anderson, J. E., van Wincoop, E. (2003). Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to the Border Puzzle. The American Economic Review, 93(1), 170-192, https://doi.org/10.1257/000282803321455214 Go to original source...
    3. 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 Go to original source...
    4. Baldwin, R., Taglioni, D. (2006). Gravity for Dummies and Dummies for Gravity Equations. National Bureau of Economic Research. Cambridge Working Paper No. 12516, https://doi.org/10.3386/w12516 Go to original source...
    5. 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 Go to original source...
    6. 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 Go to original source...
    7. 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 Go to original source...
    8. 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 Go to original source...
    9. 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 Go to original source...
    10. 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.
    11. 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 Go to original source...
    12. 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 Go to original source...
    13. Cheptea, A. (2010). Border Effects and East-West Integration. Smart Lereco Working Paper No. 10-15, 1-26.
    14. 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 Go to original source...
    15. 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.
    16. Eaton, J., Kortum, S. (2002). Technology, Geography and Trade. Econometrica, 70(5), 1741-1779, https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0262.00352 Go to original source...
    17. Feenstra, R. C. (2002). Border Effects and the Gravity Equation: Consistent Methods for Estimation. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 49(5), 491-506, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9485.00244 Go to original source...
    18. 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, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9701.2005.00749.x Go to original source...
    19. Head, K., Mayer, T. (2000). Non-Europe: The Magnitude and Causes of Market Fragmentation in Europe. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 136(2), 285-314, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02707689 Go to original source...
    20. 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.
    21. Helliwell, J. F. (1998). How Much Do National Borders Matter? Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. ISBN 9780815735540.
    22. Hilberry, R., Hummels, D. (2003). Intranational Home Bias: Some Explanations. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(4), 1089-1092, https://doi.org/10.1162/003465303772815970 Go to original source...
    23. 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 Go to original source...
    24. Krugman, P. (1980). Scale Economies, Product Differentiation and the Pattern of Trade. The American Economic Review, 70(5), 950-959.
    25. 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9701.2011.01398.x Go to original source...
    26. 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 Go to original source...
    27. McCallum, J. (1995). National Borders Matter: Canada-U.S. Regional Trade Patterns. The American Economic Review, 85(3), 615-623.
    28. 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 Go to original source...
    29. Nitsch, V. (2000). National Borders and International Trade: Evidence from the European Union. Canadian Journal of Economics, 33(4), 1091-1105, https://doi.org/10.1111/0008-4085.00055 Go to original source...
    30. 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, https://doi.org/10.2307/3585403 Go to original source...
    31. 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 Go to original source...
    32. 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
    33. Pöyhönen, P. (1963). A Tentative Model for the Volume of Trade between Countries. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 90(1), 93-99.
    34. 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, https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.91.2.386 Go to original source...
    35. 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 Go to original source...
    36. 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 Go to original source...
    37. Tinbergen, J. (1962). Shaping the World Economy - Suggestions for an International Economic Policy. New York: Twentieth Century Fund.
    38. 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.
    39. 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 Go to original source...
    40. 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 Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY NC ND 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content