Table of Content
List of Figures ... 4
List of Tables ... 4
List of Abbreviations ... 5
1 Introduction ... 7
1.1 Topical Issues of the Research ... 8
1.2 The purpose and objective of the study ... 9
1.3 Main hypothesis and auxiliary hypotheses ... 9
1.4 Research Methodology ... 10
1.5 Structure of Work ... 10
2 The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership ... 12
2.1 Background ... 12
2.2 The Multilateral Trade Liberalization ... 13
2.2.1 General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) ... 13
2.2.2 World Trade Organization (WTO) ... 14
2.2.3 DOHA Development Round ... 15
2.3 Negotiating Objects and Integration Motives of TTIP ... 15
3 Economic Effects of TTIP ... 18
3.1 Microeconomic Effects on Sectors of Economic Activity ... 18
3.1.1 Scenario of Selected Sectors ... 19
3.1.2 The MIRAGE Model ... 19
188.8.131.52 The Demand Side ... 20
184.108.40.206 The Supply Side ... 22
220.127.116.11 Capital and Investment ... 24 .1.2.4 Agriculture Modelling ... 27
3.1.3 Results of the ifo-Study ... 29
18.104.22.168 Effects Terms of Trade in Sector ... 30
22.214.171.124 Multilateral World-Trade-System and the Rule of Origin ... 32
126.96.36.199 Summary of the Microeconomic Effects ... 33
3.2 Macroeconomic Effects ... 34
3.2.1 The Market Model of Monopolistic Competition ... 34
3.2.2 The MELITZ Model ... 37
188.8.131.52 Productivity in the Melitz Model ... 38
184.108.40.206 Free Market Entry Condition (FE) ... 39
220.127.116.11 Zero Cutoff Profit (ZCP) ... 41
18.104.22.168 Comparison of Autarky and Free Trade ... 42
22.214.171.124 Impact of Trade Liberalization ... 44
3.2.3 Simulation Results of the TTIP Study ... 46
126.96.36.199 Reallocation Effects ... 47
188.8.131.52 Effects on Macroeconomic Variables ... 48
184.108.40.206 Effects on Labor Market ... 49
220.127.116.11 Summary of the Macroeconomic Effects ... 50
3.3 The Role of Standards in TTIP – Three Examples ... 50
3.3.1 Chemistry ... 51
3.3.2 Agriculture ... 51
3.3.3 Data Protection ... 52
4 TTIP Effects to Third Countries ... 54
4.1 Effects on Turkey Economy ... 54
4.1.1 Trade Relations between EU-US and Turkey ... 55
4.1.2 Methodology ... 55
4.1.3 Empirical Results ... 56
4.2 Effects on Chinese Economy ... 57
4.2.1 China’s Trade Statistics ... 58
4.2.2 Methodology ... 58
4.2.3 Empirical Results ... 58
4.3 Evaluation the Results ... 61
5 Conclusion ... 62
5.1 Summary of the Results ... 62
5.2 Proof of Hypotheses ... 63
5.3 Prospect ... 66
References ... 67
Bibliographical References ... 67
Internet References ... 69
List of Figures
Figure 1: Economic Key Figures USA/EU compared to Global Values
Figure 2: Demand Nesting for Good i (MIRAGE - Model) ... 21
Figure 3: Structure of Sector's i Production Function - MIRAGE Model ... 23
Figure 4: Change of Terms of Trade ... 30
Figure 5: Short-run Equilibrium under Monopolistic Competition ... 35
Figure 6: Long-run Equilibrium under Monopolistic Competition ... 36
Figure 7: Equilibrium in Autarkic Economy ... 42
Figure 8: Productivity Domestic and Export Market ... 43
Figure 9: Equilibrium in Open Economy ... 44
Figure 10: Impact of Free Trade to Revenue and Market Share ... 45
List of Tables
Table 1: Bilateral Trade Changes with Free On Board Prices
Table 2: Changes Bilateral Export USA - Germany ... 32
Table 3: Reallocation Effects of TTIP in Employment ... 47
Table 4: Effects of TTIP to Macroeconomic Variables ... 49
Table 5: Effects of TTIP to Germany's Labor ... 50
Table 6: Impacts of TTIP on Turkey if Turkey is excluded ... 56
Table 7: Impact of TTIP on Turkey if Turkey is included ... 56
Table 8: Trade Shares of China ... 58
Table 9: Impact on Chinese economy only TTIP ... 59
Table 10: Impact on Chinese Economy TTIP and TPP China not included ... 60
Table 11: Impact of TTIP and TPP on Chinese Economy, China included ... 60
List of Abbreviations
AGE ... Applied General Equilibrium
BASF ... Baden Aniline and Soda Factory
CEO ... Chief Executive Officer
CEPS ... Centre for European Policy Studies
CES ... Constant Elasticity of Substitution
CGE ... Computable general equilibrium
CGTA ... Center for Global Trade Analysis
CPC ... Central Product Classification
DG ... European Commission Directorate-General for Trade
DOHA ... Main city of Katar where the DOHA – round negotiate
EU ... European Union
EUR ... EURO
FDI ... Foreign Direct Investment
FE ... Free Market Entry Condition
FTA ... Free Trade Agreement
GATS ... General Agreement on Trade in Services
GATT ... General Agreements in Tariffs and Trade
GDP ... Gross Domestic Product
GTAP ... Global Trade Analysis Project
HLWG ... High level Working Group on Jobs and Growth
Ifo ... Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung
ISDS ... Investor State Dispute Settlement
MIRAGE ... Modeling International Relationships in Applied General Equilibrium
MPRA ... Munich Personal Research Papers of Economy
NAFTA ... North American Free Trade Agreement
NATO ... North Atlantic Treaty Organization
NTB ... Non-tariff Barriers
PATRIOT ... Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism
US ... United States
USA ... United States of America
USTR ... United States Trade Representative
REACH ... Regulation on Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals
THIP ... Transatlantische Handels- und Investitionspartnerschaft
TSCA ... Toxic Substances Control Act (USA)
TTIP ... Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership
WTO ... World Trade Organization
ZCP ... Zero Cutoff Profit
At the 11th February of 2013 the US High level Working Group on Jobs and Growth (HLWG) did publish in its final report, that the European - and United States - leaders launch negotiations on a comprehensive trade and investment agreement. The negotiations did start in June 2013 and 6 rounds of negotiations have taken place, but from both sides of the Atlantic it have not let to a conclusion until now.
Certain issues such as the Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS)1 give reasons for criticism about this project like
- Restriction of national sovereignty.
- Inconsistent definition of investor rights.
- Treaty Shopping.2
- Missing transparency, because investment arbitration boards work often extensively to the exclusion of the public. An example for arbitration board is NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement).
The initial enthusiasm that accompanied the launch of TTIP negotiations was filled by a series of studies highlighting the potentially positive impact of the TTIP for economic growth in Europe and the United States. The European Commission Directorate-General for Trade (DG) detects:3
Boosting trade is a very good way of boosting our economies
by creating increased demand and supply without having
to increase public spending of borrowing.
Different studies funded from the European Union as well as other foundations and institutes demonstrate in model calculations economic growth in United States and Europe. On the other hand, as noted by many studies, the economic structure of the European Union is so differentiated that the impact of TTIP will not be the same in all member states.4
Although the given disparity of the real impact of the TTIP on each member state it is useful to evaluate the effect of exemplary studies whether they are transferable to other countries.
The criticism does focus on the model character of econometric studies, unequal treatment, judicial loopholes and social responsibility.
But even using different approaches most of the studies suggest that the EU5 as a whole benefits.
Studies with subject about the impact of TTIP in the United States detect an expected job creation and a prosperity engine.
1.1 Topical Issues of the Research
The topical issues of the research depend on economic cooperation between the US and Europe and the resulting effects on economic growth on both sides of the Atlantic. The growth-promoting effects include the withdrawal of trade barriers, standardization in technical, organizational and legal matters and ultimately a political cooperation.
Opinions about TTIP differ widely. From a technical perspective, the question arises: Why must apply in the US6 and Germany different standards? For the industry, this is a controversial issue. So reports the German automotive industry at March 2nd 2015 in the newspaper7 about an expenditure of billions EURO per year for unnecessary duplicated work.
The German Chancellor Angela Merkel said at the 150-year anniversary of the BASF8, that the chemical company paid 140 million EUR per year in customs duties on exports to the US. Our goal should be that this money could be differently applied, e.g. for research and development. In New York is currently running the 9th round of negotiations between the European Union and the United States to a TTIP reach. The eliminations of tariffs and double standards should generate on both sides of the Atlantic more economic growth.9
The CEO10 of BASF Mr. Kurt Bock did establish that chemistry is a key industry that is highly regulated and very dependent on the political framework. He said: “Our growth will continue to play, especially outside of Europe. As BASF, we want actively shape this change.”11
With regard to the current issues, this essay relates to the economic issues.
1.2 The purpose and objective of the study
In contrary to regional trade agreements a transatlantic agreement due to the large economic power of the partners USA and Europe gives the possibility to generate a substantial economic growth.
The United States and Europe has similar economic development levels, a high level of mutual investment activities, a deep political integration especially in the Common Defense Policy (NATO)12 and a high cultural proximity.
The objective of this essay is - with reference to existing studies – to demonstrate, that for analysis of microeconomic and macroeconomic effects, the model calculation of econometrics is practicable.
It is not the objective of this essay to lead the mathematical proof of the econometric models. Rather it is the objective of this essay to explain the econometric models in order to calculate the economic effects of TTIP to the United States, Europe and third countries.
1.3 Main hypothesis and auxiliary hypotheses
Main hypotheses H0
Europe and the United States benefit in microeconomic and macroeconomic terms from the effects of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership TTIP.
Auxiliary hypothesis AH1
The economic benefits of TTIP for USA and Europe can be detected by scientific econometric studies.
Auxiliary hypotheses AH2
Under realistic assumptions plausible estimates can be calculated with econometric studies. To reach this objective a combination of empirical realism and theoretical consistency is used.
Auxiliary hypothesis AH3
With the so-called putty-clay hypothesis, capital can be converted from flexible capital into durable goods but which cannot then converted back into re-investable capital.
Auxiliary hypothesis AH4
The benefit of TTIP is not equal portioned to the 28 member countries of the European Union. Member states with lower competiveness will lose trade volume.
Auxiliary hypothesis AH5
The increase in the economic power of companies contains within itself the risk of reduction global objectives which are sustainability and social responsibility.
1.4 Research Methodology
As research methodology, a systematical theory based secondary analysis will be used.
Studies which were ordered by the European Union will be used as well as studies from different foundations.
Regarding to the economic effects of TTIP and the therefore used studies, the analysis of the studies is carried out via the following steps:
- Presentation of the scenario.
- Description of model properties.
- Explanation of results.
Regarding to the political, social and legal issues, the used literature on this topics will be summarized.
1.5 Structure of Work
The first part is referred to the essential components of TTIP. These include the negotiating institutions, the central regulations and the objectives associated with it.
Chapter three forms the core of this essay. In the first part microeconomic effects on selected sectors in the EU and USA are carried out. The used econometric model MIRAGE will be explained and the calculated results are demonstrated. In the second part of chapter three macroeconomic effects are considered, which have been calculated on the basis of the MELITZ model.
The central sources of this chapter are the following studies: “Dimensions and Effects of a Transatlantic Free Trade Agreement between the EU and US.” from IFO13-institute in Munich.
To address also effects to third countries, as an example two studies related to turkey and china are used.
Chapter 5 will give a summary and check whether the hypothesis of this essay has been proofed.
2 The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership
The negotiating committee is the government of the United States and the European Union. The USA is represented by the President Barack Obama. The EU is represented by the President of the European Council Donald Tusk and the European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker. The negotiating committee consist employees of the European Commission and the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR).
The future prosperity of Europe is critically dependent on an easy access to international markets. World trade can receive major new inputs through an open, reliable and well-regulated partnership between the European Union and the USA. The TTIP should include free trade agreements but also help to shape the development of regulatory cooperation for the world trade in the 21st century.
The TTIP have direct effects on c.a. 45% of the world supply and 30% of world trade. But there are also effects on third countries which could be expected. Beside the energy resources the total volume of imports by the European Union from the developing countries is more than the total volume, which is imported by USA, Canada, China and Japan from developing countries together. Additionally the USA is an important market for the development countries. 30% of all third countries export more than 50% of the total export volume with the TTIP partners.14
Bilateral agreements like TTIP also lead to trade diversion. Lower trade costs in the partner countries of TTIP would cause higher price competitiveness to the import from third countries. So on one side, the third countries could participate from economic growth in the TTIP partners with increasing demand to their own products. On the other hand with the disadvantage of custom duties on their own product when exporting to the TTIP partners, the demand could be reduced.15
Whether and, if so, in what manner which third countries could be affected by a TTIP. It is an open question which requires consideration a variety of factors.16
Against this background, the use of econometric models used to calculate the impact of TTIP to the negotiation States USA and Europe as well as third countries is essential.
Within the CEPR17-series CEPS18, Pelkman, J. et. al.19 did verify the study of the European Commission with the question:
Does the CGE20 model used by the commission correspond to the analytical needs
of the ex-ante impact assessment of such potential trade and investment agreement?
The broad answer was found with YES. Pelkmann, et al. comes to the conclusion, that there are no better alternatives to assess the impacts of trade agreements than CGE modelling. Indeed it allows modelling the behavior of actors in the entire economy, including many sectors.
2.2 The Multilateral Trade Liberalization
2.2.1 General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)
In 1947 the first set of rules for normalization and control of international trade has been set with a coalition of 23 nations: General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). GATT is considered as the first multilateral agreement of the World Trade History. The objective of this agreement was to promote through the reduction of tariff barriers the world trade for all member states of GATT.
It contains two central non-discrimination bids:
- Most Nation Favored Principle requirements that the penalties imposed by a duty for every trading partner apply equally. No country will be discriminated
by individually raised tariffs.
- Non-discrimination of goods of certain origin. In order for equal treatment of domestic and foreign goods should be ensured.21
Until 1994 eight United Nations Conference on Trade and Development were organized, in which the tariff reduction was agreed. The global trade volume has increased during this time by 16 times. The number of members did increase to 117 nations.
2.2.2 World Trade Organization (WTO)
The WTO adopted on January 1st in Geneva (CH) and comprised now 159 members. The primary goal is still the liberalization of world trade through the elimination of tariff barriers and further trade restrictions. With respect to the WTO there are 3 agreements:
- GATT which has been adopted,
- GATS22, agreed for the international exchange of services and
- TRIPS23, which regulates the international usage of intellectual property.
The WTO monitors compliance of the agreements between the member states. In case of failure to comply the WTO can impose import restrictions for goods from the sanctioned state.24
The problematic in the WTO lies in the principle “One Country – One Vote”. A country such as Malta has the same voting rights as the entire European Union. In addition, a decision may fail on the veto of once member state.
Decisions are made in the so-called “Ministerial Conference”. Because of the agreed principle “Single Undertaking”, decisions about single contractual items can only take effect with the adoption of the whole agenda. Because of this, the implementation of necessary measures considerably delays.25
2.2.3 DOHA Development Round
Because of the problematic in the WTO as discussed in the previous chapter, in 2001 an additional ministerial conference has been convened at DOHA (Qatar). The goal is to find an agreement about the so-called WTO-PLUS issues, which are the protection of foreign direct investment and to open up markets for scientific and capital-intensive goods and services.
In 2012 a report to the WTO General Council by ‘Lamy’ advocated small steps going forward in re-thinking about the greater differences. “The discussion focused on the systemic conditions under which global value chains can work better, including the importance of trade facilitation measures, the blurring frontier between goods and services and adequate and affordable trade finance.”26
Representatives of the developing and emerging countries, especially India, Brazil and China require significant concessions with regards to the elimination of import tariffs on textiles and the EU’s trade-distorting agricultural subsidies.
With the abrogation of the “Single-Undertaking” principle the WTO succeeded in December 2013 with the conclusion of the Bali-Package: Simplifying of trade bureaucracy.27
Nevertheless a timely conclusion of the multilateral negotiations is not expected. Because of this, the regional trade liberalization is pursued.
2.3 Negotiating Objects and Integration Motives of TTIP
In the negotiation guidelines of the European Union, the central contents of the negotiations of TTIP are defined as follows:
- Expansion of trade and investment.
- Increasing the regulatory compatibility.
- Creating jobs and economic growth.
- Promotion of worldwide standards.
By removing barriers to trade tariff the potential of transatlantic commerce should be better exploited.
Even non-tariff barriers to trade should be reformed of eliminated entirely. These include a high degree of recognition and harmonization of norms and standards in the areas of health, defense, consumer protection, labor, ecology and culture. The regulatory cooperation is to be improved as well as the cooperation between the governments. Overall, increasing the efficiency of international trade is the central objective with TTIP.28
1 If an investor from one country (the "Home State") invests in another country (the "Host State"), both of which have agreed to ISDS, and the Host State violates the rights granted to the investor under public international law , then that investor may bring the matter before an arbitral tribunal.
2 Treaty shopping enables investors by setting up a subsidiary in one of the sates parties to assert claims of an investment protection agreement content although the company comes from another country and the subsidiary might only be a letterbox company. In: Louis T. Wells, The Emerging Global Regime for Investment: A Response, Harvard International Law Journal Vol. 52 (October 2010), P. 43.
4 Compare to: Bendini, R., De Micco, P.: The expected impact of the TTIP on EU member states and selected third countries. In: DG EXPO/B/PolDep/Noe/2014_119, European Parliament
5 EU – European Union
6 US – United States
7 In „STUTTGARTER ZEITUNG“, http://www.stuttgarter-zeitung.de/inhalt.geplantes-freihandelsabkommen- autobauer-machen-sich-stark-fuer-ttip.a446f96f-6181-4c76-9e82-a0fe9a7a2635.html
8 BASF SE is the largest chemical producer in the world and is headquartered in Ludwigshafen, Germany. BASF originally stood for Baden Aniline and Soda Factory). https://www.basf.com/group/corporate/en/careers/career_de/About_BASF_DE/BASF_Headquarters_1_3
9 In: „STUTTGARTER ZEITUNG“ at 23rd April 2015. http://www.stuttgarter-zeitung.de/inhalt.bundeskanzlerin-bei-basf-merkel-verteidigt-ttip.f1666c62-6d60-4d6d-80ce- 0dfb5f8faed7.html
10 CEO – Chief Executive Officer
11 In: „STUTTGARTER ZEITUNG“, at 23rd April 2015, ibid.
12 The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO; French: Organisation du traité de l'Atlantique Nord ; OTAN), also called the North Atlantic Alliance, is an intergovernmental military alliance based on the North Atlantic Treaty which was signed on 4 April 1949. The organization constitutes a system of collective defence whereby its member states agree to mutual defense in response to an attack by any external party. NATO's headquarters are in Brussels, Belgium, one of the 28 member states across North America and Europe, the newest of which, Albania and Croatia, joined in April 2009. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO
13 IFO: The Ifo Institute for Economic Research is a Munich-based research institution. IFO is an acronym from Information and Forschung (research). As one of Germany's largest economic think-tanks, it analyses economic policy and is widely known for its monthly Ifo Business Climate Index for Germany. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ifo_Institute_for_Economic_Research
14 Compare to: Felbermayr, G, Kohler, W., Aichele, R., Klee, G. and Yalcin, E.: Mögliche Auswirkungen der Transatlantischen Handels- und Investitionspartnerschaft (TTIP) auf Entwicklungs- und Schwellenländer. IFO-Institute, Jan. 2015, München. Page 6. [IFO-3RD
15 Compare to: Felbermayr, G, [IFO-3RD, ibid. Page 8.
16 Compare to: Felbermyr, G, [IFO-3RD, ibid. Page 9.
17 The Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR), a registered European charity founded in 1983 by Richard Portes, FBA, CBE, is a network of over 700 researchers based mainly in universities throughoutEurope, who collaborate through the center in research and its dissemination. CEPR's office is located in London but CEPR is a Think-Net drawing on academic research across Europe. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centre_for_Economic_Policy_Research
18 The Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS) is a think tank based in Brussels, Belgium that undertakes research "leading to solutions to the challenges facing Europe today". It was established in 1983. CEPS employees a mixture of permanent staff, research fellows based at other institutions such as universities, and professionals. The methods used are coming from CEPR. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centre_for_European_Policy_Studies
19 Pelkmans, J., Lejour, A., Schrefler, L., Mustilli, F. and Timini, J.: The Impact of TTIP. - The underlying economic model and comparisons. In: CEPR (Center for Economic Policy Research, London), Series. No. 93 / October 2014. TTIP Series No. 1
20 Computable general equilibrium (CGE) models are a class of economic models that use actual economic data to estimate how an economy might react to changes in policy, technology or other external factors. CGE models are also referred to as AGE ( applied general equilibrium) models. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computable_general_equilibrium
21 Compare to: Gelbreich, K. and Müller,S.: Handbuch Internationales Management. München. 2011. Page 25. Stiens, Ph.: Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). Auswirkungen auf die globale Handelsordnung. 2014. Page 7.
22 GATS – General Agreement on Trade in Services is a treaty of the WTO that entered into force in January 1995 as a result of the Uruguay Round negotiations. The treaty was created to extend the multilateral trading system to service sector, in the same way the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) provides such a system for merchandise trade. All members of the WTO are signatories to the GATS. The basic WTO principle of most favoured nation (MFN) applies to GATS as well. However, upon accession, Members may introduce temporary exemptions to this rule. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Agreement_on_Trade_in_Services
23 The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) is an international agreement administered by the World Trade Organization (WTO) that sets down minimum standards for many forms of intellectual property (IP) regulation as applied to nationals of other WTO Members. Under intellectual property laws, owners of intellectual property are granted certain exclusive rights. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIPS_Agreement , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property
24 Compare to: Krugmann, P.R., Obstfeld, M., Melitz, M.J.: Internationale Wirtschaft – Theorie und Politik der Außenwirtschaft. 9th edition.2012. München. Page 334 ff. Stiens, Ph., ibid, page 9.
25 Compare to: Haas, H.-D.: Internationale Wirtschaft. Rahmenbedingungen, Akteure, räumliche Prozesse. München, 2006. Page 88.
26 Lamy, P.: Director-General of the World Trade Organization (WTO) until 1 September 2013: Members continue to explore opportunities for Doha progress. WTO 2012. News Items. https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news12_e/gc_rpt_01may12_e.htm
27 The Ninth World Trade OrganizationMinisterial Conference was held in Bali, Indonesia from 3 to 7 December 2013. The conference was chaired by the Indonesian Trade Minister Gita Wirjawan. In this conference, 159 members of World Trade Organization agreed to the Bali Package which aims to ease barriers to international trade. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Organization_Ministerial_Conference_of_2013
28 Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie: Leitlinien für die Verhandlungen über ein umfassendes Handels- und Investitionsabkommen – bezeichnet als Transatlantische Handels- und Investitionspartnerschaft – zwischen der Europäischen Union und den Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika. Kurzerläuterungen zum TTIP-Verhandlungsmandat. http://www.bmwi.de/BMWi/Redaktion/PDF/S-T/ttip-mandat-kommentiert,property=pdf,bereich=bmwi2012,sprache=de,rwb=true.pdf. Page 2 ff.
- Quote paper
- Uwe Lebefromm (Author), 2015, Microeconomic and Macroeconomic Effects of TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership), Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/302871