Intranational Home Bias in Trade

A number of recent studies have found intranational trade to be excessive compared to international trade, based on a gravity specification. The preferred explanation for this finding has been the presence of formal and informal trade barriers, with associated welfare consequences. If such barriers were indeed the sole culprit, home bias should not exist on the subnational level. We find, however, that home bias is present within U.S. states, suggesting the presence of other causes of excessive home trade.

[1]  John Ries,et al.  Immigration and Trade Creation: Econometric Evidence from Canada , 1998 .

[2]  Carolyn L. Evans.  National borders and international trade , 1999 .

[3]  J. Bergstrand.  The Generalized Gravity Equation, Monopolistic Competition, and the Factor-Proportions Theory in International Trade , 1989 .

[4]  B. Ohlin.  Some Aspects of the Relations between International Movements of Commodities, Factors of Production, and Technology , 1977 .

[5]  J. Bergstrand.  The Gravity Equation in International Trade: Some Microeconomic Foundations and Empirical Evidence , 1985 .

[6]  James E. Anderson.  A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation , 1979 .

[7]  Ernesto H. Stein,et al.  Trading blocs and the Americas: The natural, the unnatural, and the super-natural , 1995 .

[8]  E. Ullman,et al.  American Commodity Flow , 1958 .

[9]  James E. Rauch.  Does History Matter Only When it Matters Little? the Case of City-Indu Try Location , 1993 .

[10]  M. Gaudry,et al.  A First Gross Measure of Unexploited Single Market Integration Potential , 1996 .

[11]  J. Melvin.  The Regional Economic Consequences of Tariffs and Domestic Transportation Costs , 1985 .

[12]  B. Ohlin,et al.  Interregional and International Trade. , 1936 .

[13]  W. Isard,et al.  Location Theory and International and Interregional Trade Theory , 1954 .

[14]  David E. Weinstein,et al.  Does Economic Geography Matter for International Specialization? , 1996 .

[15]  J. Ross Mackay,et al.  THE INTERACTANCE HYPOTHESIS AND BOUNDARIES IN CANADA: A PRELIMINARY STUDY , 1958 .

[16]  E. Ravenstein.  The Laws of Migration , 1885, Encyclopedia of Gerontology and Population Aging.

[17]  Paul S. Armington.  A Theory of Demand for Products Distinguished by Place of Production (Une théorie de la demande de produits différenciés d'après leur origine) (Una teoría de la demanda de productos distinguiéndolos según el lugar de producción) , 1969 .

[18]  Michael A. Anderson,et al.  Canadian Provinces in World Trade: Engagement and Detachment , 1999 .

[19]  J. Levinsohn,et al.  Monopolistic Competition and International Trade: Reconsidering the Evidence , 1993 .

[20]  G. Grossman.  Imperfect competition and international trade , 1992 .

[21]  P. Gould.  People in information space : the mental maps and information surfaces of Sweden , 1975 .

[22]  Börje Johansson,et al.  Affinities and frictions of trade networks , 1994 .

[23]  H. Kierzkowski.  Monopolistic Competition and International Trade , 1989 .

[24]  Vincent J. Geraci,et al.  Bilateral Trade Flows and Transport Costs , 1977 .

[25]  D. Gould.  Immigrant Links to the Home Country: Implications for Trade, Welfare, and Factor Returns , 1996 .

[26]  J. Cavanaugh.  Formulation, Analysis and Testing of the Interactance Hypothesis , 1950 .

[27]  S. Stouffer.  Intervening opportunities: a theory relating mobility and distance , 1940 .

[28]  G. Macdougall.  The Network of World Trade. , 1943 .

[29]  J. Helliwell.  Convergence and migration among provinces. , 1996, The Canadian journal of economics. Revue canadienne d'economique.

[30]  Barry Eichengreen,et al.  The Role of History in Bilateral Trade Flows , 1996 .

[31]  Alan V. Deardorff.  Chapter 10 Testing trade theories and predicting trade flows , 1984 .

[32]  J. Fidrmuc,et al.  Disintegration and Trade , 2000 .

[33]  Stuart C. Dodd,et al.  The Interactance Hypothesis: A Gravity Model Fitting Physical Masses and Human Groups , 1950 .

[34]  Edward L. Glaeser,et al.  Geographic Concentration in U.S. Manufacturing Industries: A Dartboard Approach , 1994, Journal of Political Economy.

[35]  J. Helliwell.  Do National Borders Matter for Quebec&Apos;S Trade? , 1995 .

[36]  John Mccallum,et al.  National Borders Matter: Canada-U.S. Regional Trade Patterns , 1995 .

[37]  S. Evenett,et al.  On Theories Explaining the Success of the Gravity Equation , 1998, Journal of Political Economy.

[38]  Elhanan Helpman,et al.  Imperfect competition and international trade: Evidence from fourteen industrial countries , 1987 .

[39]  Marcos Sanso,et al.  Bilateral trade flows, the gravity equation, and functional form , 1993 .

[40]  K. Head,et al.  Agglomeration Benefits and Location Choice: Evidence from Japanese Manufacturing Investment in the United States , 1994 .

[41]  C. Engel,et al.  How Wide is the Border? , 1994 .

[42]  Gerald A. P. Carrothers.  An Historical Bedew of the Gravity and Potential Concepts of Human Interaction , 1956 .

[43]  Ashoka Mody,et al.  Buyer-seller links in export development , 1992 .

[44]  J. Harrigan,et al.  SCALE ECONOMIES AND THE VOLUME OF TRADE , 1994 .

[45]  George Kingsley Zipf,et al.  Human behavior and the principle of least effort , 1949 .

[46]  J. Melvin.  Domestic taste differences, transportation costs and international trade , 1985 .

[47]  W. Beckerman,et al.  Distance and the pattern of intra-European trade , 1956 .