Transport Infrastructure and Trade Facilitation in the Greater Mekong Subregion

Abstract

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. Terms of use: Documents in Asian Development Bank InstituteThe Working Paper series is a continuation of the formerly named Discussion Paper series; the numbering of the papers continued without interruption or change. ADBI's working papers reflect initial ideas on a topic and are posted online for discussion. ADBI encourages readers to post their comments on the main page for each working paper (given in the citation below). Some working papers may develop into other forms of publication. AbstractAs trade is an important driver of growth and infrastructure is a necessity for trade, infrastructure development has a key role to play in economic development. This study aims to quantify the potential benefits of the development of the economic transport corridors, along with the implementation of the Cross-Border Transport Agreement (CBTA) in the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS). Some of the key linkages between upgraded infrastructure, economic growth, and sectoral responses are explored using a computable general equilibrium (CGE) framework. The study provides a static view of one-off gains from a conservative estimate in a reduction in transport costs and improvements in trade facilitation. The findings show clear gains from improvements in physical land transport and the more substantial gains from improved trade facilitation. The results also provide a glimpse into the potential gains from intra-regional trade, highlighting the potential markets within the GMS. The implications of these results are that once a sufficient physical system is in place, additional benefits are marginal compared with improvements in policy initiatives under the heading of trade facilitation. While the GMS does not have the level of physical infrastructure that would be considered adequate for its desired level of economic activity, the results show that investing in soft aspects now still has substantial payback. In the future, as a greater physical base is put in place, the region should enjoy further benefits from expanded markets having a solid trade facilitation system in place. In sum, the CBTA and transport corridor development can significantly improve transit times and trade service costs, albeit with some drawbacks, throughout the region. JEL Classification: F15, I32, L91, O19 ADBI Working Paper 130Stone and Strutt

The Role of Issue Linkage in Managing Noncooperating Basins: The Case of the Mekong

“…Openness, as measured by the ratio of the sum of exports and imports of goods and services to GDP, increased in all the GMS countries except Myanmar during the last two decades (Srivastava and Kumar []). However, while there is some variation across the GMS, overall it remains a relatively poor region (Stone and Strutt []). Srivastava and Kumar [] find that, in the five lower Mekong countries (GMS5), the growth of trade has been rapid even without China.…”

“…In their works, Bennett et al [], Kliot et al [2001], and Kemfert [] suggested that the complexity of international negotiations can be better modeled by linking independent games. Regional economic development, which can involve treaty commitments to develop the basin through construction of infrastructure (such as land transport projects in the Greater Mekong subregion (GMS), dams, barrages, or irrigation networks, or even linking trade agreements), is among the most promising direction perceived by states to generate positive gains (Stone and Strust [], UNEP []).…”

Transport Corridors for Wider Socio–Economic Development

“…Simulation-based estimates have demonstrated that transport infrastructure and services make substantial contributions to GDP in the long run [21,[25][26][27][28][29]. Hahm and Raihan [25] used a Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) model to estimate the total economic gains from the six Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) economic corridors.…”

ASEAN's New Frontiers: Integrating the Newest Members into theASEANEconomic Community

“…Surveys like the World Bank's Doing Business indicators (DB) or the World Economic Forum's Enabling Trade Index (ETI) do not cover all CLMV countries, but what is reported suggests high‐trade costs. Stone and Strutt (), analyzing the 2008 waves of these surveys, found exceptionally high‐trade costs for Lao PDR (in DB) and that Cambodia ranked 113th out of the 118 economies covered by ETI. Plummer and Chia (; p. 15), based on DB 2009, report that Cambodia, Lao PDR, and Vietnam all rank below the ASEAN average, although the gap is least for Vietnam, which ranks above Indonesia and the Philippines by many DB criteria (but not on the Trading across Borders component).…”