Does Trade Still Follow the Flag?

Pollins, Brian M.

doi:10.2307/1962400

Cited by 283 publications

(164 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

151

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Past research finds that the strength of political ties between a home-host pair has a direct and positive impact on bilateral trade (Morrow, Silverson, & Tabaresem, 1998;Pollins, 1989;Boehmer, Gartzke, & Li, 2001) and FDI flows (Nigh, 1985;Li & Vashchilko, 2010). We argue that, in addition to this direct impact, bilateral political relations have an indirect impact on FDI through its interaction with host expropriation risk.…”

Section: /36mentioning

confidence: 60%

State-owned MNCs and host country expropriation risk: The role of home state soft power and economic gunboat diplomacy

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Expropriation risk has a binding effect on foreign direct investment (FDI). However, state-owned multinational corporation (MNCs) may counter the monopoly power of the host state by leveraging the political influence of their home government. The magnitude of this counter force, we argue, may vary, depending on the strength of political relations between the home and host state, and the level of economic dependence of the host country on the home market. We find supporting evidence of our hypotheses using Chinese firm level FDI information between 2003 and 2010.

show abstract

Section: /36mentioning

confidence: 60%

State-owned MNCs and host country expropriation risk: The role of home state soft power and economic gunboat diplomacy

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The empirical evidence from the few available studies is mixed, however. Pollins (1989aPollins ( , 1989b, van Bergeijk (1994), and Mansfield and Bronson (1997) estimate gravity models and find that conflict lowers trade. 4 In contrast, Morrow et al (1998Morrow et al ( , 1999, Mansfield and Pevehouse (2000), and Penubarti and Ward (2000) also utilize gravity models, but find that the effect of conflict, though negative, is not statistically significant.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collateral Damage: Trade Disruption and the Economic Impact of War

Glick

Taylor

2005

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Conventional wisdom in economic history suggests that conflict between countries can be enormously disruptive of economic activity, especially international trade. Yet nothing is known empirically about these effects in large samples. We study the effects of war on bilateral trade for almost all countries with available data extending back to 1870. Using the gravity model, we estimate the contemporaneous and lagged effects of wars on the trade of belligerent nations and neutrals, controlling for other determinants of trade. We find large and persistent impacts of wars on trade, and hence on national and global economic welfare. A rough accounting indicates that such costs might be of the same order of magnitude as the ""direct"" costs of war, such as lost human capital, as illustrated by case studies of World War I and World War II. Terms of use: Documents in Department of EconomicsOne

show abstract

“…6 In addition to the purely economic characteristics of goods and services such as price, quantity and quality, political relations can also influence trade. Pollins (1989aPollins ( , 1989b (2007) provides evidence that the trade-reducing impact of bad bilateral political relations is reduced if internationalist economic interests are strong, which is proxied for by low trade barriers. According to him, this provides an explanation of the strong commercial ties between the PRC and the ROC despite the obvious tensions.…”

Section: The Politics-trade Nexus and The Role Of Economic Diplomacymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is a large literature on the trade-politics nexus that analyzes the economic consequences of bad political relations (e.g., Pollins 1989aPollins , 1989bDavis and Meunier 2011;Pandya and Venkatesan forthcoming). The rise of China to become the world's largest exporter and second largest economy after the United States (CIA 2015) is likely to alter what we know about these relationships.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%