05.04.2013 Views

U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement: Potential Economy-wide ... - USITC

U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement: Potential Economy-wide ... - USITC

U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement: Potential Economy-wide ... - USITC

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

2004–2006 calendar years, we report the percentage by which the <strong>Korea</strong>n import unit value<br />

exceeds the trade-weighted import unit value by all countries that report quantities of the<br />

product in the same units as does <strong>Korea</strong>; the latter is a proxy for a world price. 4 <strong>Korea</strong>n<br />

import unit values significantly above this are consistent with the view that NTMs may be<br />

affecting trade and leading to a price distortion. As a check on this, however we also try to<br />

control for the mix of products <strong>Korea</strong> imports within that trade category, which we do by<br />

noting the percentage by which <strong>Korea</strong>’s unit value of imports from the United States exceeds<br />

the U.S. export unit value to the world (this comparison assumes that what U.S. exporters<br />

sell to <strong>Korea</strong> is comparable to what they sell to the world). Some of this discrepancy may be<br />

attributable to shipping costs but where the import unit value differences are relatively large,<br />

one may infer that some is due to the capture of rents by various parties involved in the<br />

international transaction.<br />

We also perform quantity comparisons in which average <strong>Korea</strong>n import quantities from the<br />

world, at the HS-6 level, are compared with import quantities of other countries. Since one<br />

would expect that larger economies import more, the comparisons are made in terms of<br />

import quantity per million dollars of GDP. 5 In general, whenever quantity information is<br />

included in the analysis, or either the import quantity relative to GDP is less than 25 percent<br />

that of the median country, <strong>Korea</strong>n import quantity relative to GDP ranks in the bottom<br />

25 percent of countries with available data, or both.<br />

In making quantity comparisons, one should recognize that cross-cultural differences in<br />

consumer tastes and preferences may play a role in differences in the quantity imported. This<br />

is, however, less likely as the deviation of import quantity relative to GDP from the global<br />

average increases.<br />

Price and quantity data were taken from Global <strong>Trade</strong> Analyzer, a product of GTIS, which<br />

reports primary-country trade data for a sample of over 60 countries, which include most<br />

important traders. Prices are calculated as unit values and averaged over 2004–06. Quantity<br />

comparisons are averaged over 2003–05 due to the lag in availability of comparable GDP<br />

data. Unit values are in standardized units of measure wherever possible; e.g., metric tons<br />

have been converted to kilograms. For some manufactured goods, such as medical devices,<br />

units of measure are not standardized internationally and comparisons have been made for<br />

the subset of countries with units of measure comparable to those used in <strong>Korea</strong>n trade data.<br />

This may affect the quality of the comparisons, and has been noted when applicable.<br />

4 While they used this for a different purpose, the average world import unit value was also taken to be a<br />

world price proxy by Gibson, Wainio, Whitley, and Bohman, Profiles of Tariffs in Gobal Agricultural<br />

Markets, Agricultural Economic Report No. AER796, USDA, January 2001. The comparison of the <strong>Korea</strong>n<br />

import unit value to this world price proxy would be a conservative estimate of the extent to which <strong>Korea</strong>n<br />

trade distortions raise their import price if <strong>Korea</strong>’s imports within the product category were of the same<br />

composition and quality as are those of the rest of the world, as the world average import-unit-value is itself<br />

likely raised by other countries’ trade distortions.<br />

5 This is equivalent to maintaining the hypothesis that import demand of the representative international<br />

consumer is unit-elastic with respect to income; i.e., that a 1 percent increase in income leads to a 1-percent<br />

increase in import demand. Exploratory econometrics showed that this is a reasonable assumption for the<br />

products under consideration in this study, and in most cases is a conservative assumption. That is, most of<br />

the true income elasticities are likely to be somewhat higher than 1. If these were used in the analysis, we<br />

would be more likely to find that <strong>Korea</strong>n import quantities appeared unusually low.<br />

J-5

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!