Trade Shocks, Credit Reallocation and the Role of Specialisation: Evidence from Syndicated Lending
IWH Discussion Papers,
This paper provides evidence that banks cut lending to US borrowers as a consequence of a trade shock. This adverse reaction is stronger for banks with higher ex-ante lending to US industries hit by the trade shock. Importantly, I document large heterogeneity in banks‘ reaction depending on their sectoral specialisation. Banks shield industries in which they are specialised in and at the same time reduce the availability of credit to industries they are not specialised in. The latter is driven by low-capital banks and lending to firms that are themselves hit by the trade shock. Banks‘ adjustments have adverse real effects.
Trade, Misallocation, and Capital Market Integration
IWH-CompNet Discussion Papers,
I study how cross-country capital market integration affects the gains from trade in a model with financial frictions and heterogeneous, forward-looking firms. The model predicts that misallocation among exporters increases as trade barriers fall, even as misallocation decreases in the aggregate. The reason is that financially constrained productive exporters increase their production only marginally, while unproductive exporters survive for longer and increase their size. Allowing capital inflows magnifies misallocation, because unproductive firms expand even more, leading to a decline in aggregate productivity. Nevertheless, under integrated capital markets, access to cheaper capital dominates the adverse effect on productivity, leading to higher output, consumption and welfare than under closed capital markets. Applied to the period of European integration between 1992 and 2008, I find that underdeveloped sectors experiencing higher export exposure had more misallocation of capital and a higher share of unproductive firms, thus the data is consistent with the model’s predictions. A key implication of the model is that TFP is a poor proxy for consumption growth after trade liberalisation.
Die Wirkungen von Handelsliberalisierungen: Ein Vergleich zwischen dem Melitz-Ansatz und der endogenen Wachstumstheorie
Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden,
Matthias Mertens diskutiert Vor- und Nachteile des Melitz- und des endogenen Wachstumsansatzes hinsichtlich der Analyse von (Wohlfahrts-)Effekten einer Handelsliberalisierung und zeigt, dass beide Ansätze eine Daseins-Berechtigung besitzen, da sie verschiedene Handelsliberalisierungsaspekte in den Fokus setzen. Die Arbeit ermöglicht eine einfache Modellauswahl für die Analyse relevanter handelspolitischer Fragestellungen und Anwendungsfälle. Weiterhin verdeutlicht der Autor das Zukunftspotential hybrider Ansätze, welche endogene Wachstumsmodelle und Melitz-Modelle miteinander kombinieren und zur Entwicklung einer generalisierten Modelltheorie für die Analyse von Handelsliberalisierungswirkungen beitragen können.
Revenue Implications of Trade Liberalization
IMF Occasional Papers, No. 180,
In recent decades many countries have dismantled trade barriers and opened their economies to international competition. Trade liberalization is seen to promote economic efficiency, international competitiveness, and an expansion of trade, perhaps especially in imperfectly competitive markets. Yet despite this progress in trade liberalization, as evidenced by the conclusion of the Uruguay Round in 1994 and the establishment of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995, trade barriers are still widespread. Some economies and some sectors (e.g., agriculture in many industrial countries) remain relatively insulated from the global economy by a variety of nontariff and tariff barriers, even as import substitution continues to lose ground as a strategy for economic development.