Trade policy & lobbying effectiveness: Theory and evidence for India

被引:12
|
作者
Saha, Amrita [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sussex, Dept Econ, Brighton BN1 9RH, E Sussex, England
关键词
Lobbying effectiveness; Trade policy; India; ENDOGENOUS PROTECTION; POLITICAL-SUPPORT; SALE; LIBERALIZATION; INDUSTRIES;
D O I
10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2018.08.004
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
How do we understand differences in effectiveness in lobbying for trade policy? To explain lobbying effectiveness, I introduce a new measure into Grossman and Helpman's (1994, American Economic Review 84: 833-850) model of protection-for-sale (PFS). Differences in effectiveness are explained on the basis that some groups make a better case for protection by sending a signal regarding information they possess and that is considered by policy makers before setting trade policies. I begin by estimating a standard PFS model for India using a measure of political organization, a common approach in the empirical literature on PFS. To overcome the need to define such a binary political organization variable, I then use panel data to estimate the new measure of relative lobbying effectiveness. For the most effective sectors, a high output to import ratio translates into higher trade protection; for the least effective sectors, higher output to import ratio translates into lower trade protection. Examining some of the political economy influences on lobbying effectiveness, I find that producing similar goods reduces the positive effect of geographical proximity on effectiveness. Hence, within a sector, firms in close proximity and producing similar goods compete to lobby rather than cooperating or free-riding.
引用
收藏
页码:165 / 192
页数:28
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Join hands or walk alone? Evidence on lobbying for trade policy in India
    Saha, Amrita
    [J]. ECONOMICS & POLITICS, 2020, 32 (01) : 28 - 67
  • [2] Bimodal lobbying and trade policy outcomes: Evidence from corporate political activity under uncertainty in India
    Saha, Amrita
    Shirodkar, Vikrant
    Lawton, Thomas C. C.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS POLICY, 2023, 6 (01) : 24 - 46
  • [3] Bimodal lobbying and trade policy outcomes: Evidence from corporate political activity under uncertainty in India
    Amrita Saha
    Vikrant Shirodkar
    Thomas C. Lawton
    [J]. Journal of International Business Policy, 2023, 6 : 24 - 46
  • [4] Lobbying costs and trade policy
    Tovar, Patricia
    [J]. JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS, 2011, 83 (02) : 126 - 136
  • [5] New Evidence for the Theory of Groups Trade Association Lobbying in Washington, DC
    Drope, Jeffrey M.
    Hansen, Wendy L.
    [J]. POLITICAL RESEARCH QUARTERLY, 2009, 62 (02) : 303 - 316
  • [6] LOBBYING COMPETITION OVER TRADE POLICY
    Gawande, Kishore
    Krishna, Pravin
    Olarreaga, Marcelo
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2012, 53 (01) : 115 - 132
  • [7] Cooperative lobbying and endogenous trade policy
    Toke Skovsgaard Aidt
    [J]. Public Choice, 1997, 93 : 455 - 475
  • [8] Cooperative lobbying and endogenous trade policy
    Aidt, TS
    [J]. PUBLIC CHOICE, 1997, 93 (3-4) : 455 - 475
  • [9] Trade policy substitution: theory and evidence
    Beverelli, Cosimo
    Boffa, Mauro
    Keck, Alexander
    [J]. REVIEW OF WORLD ECONOMICS, 2019, 155 (04) : 755 - 783
  • [10] Trade policy substitution: theory and evidence
    Cosimo Beverelli
    Mauro Boffa
    Alexander Keck
    [J]. Review of World Economics, 2019, 155 : 755 - 783