Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl


2015 | 2(4) | 91-129

Article title

Trade Policy Barriers: An Obstacle to Export Diversification in Eurasia


Title variants

Languages of publication



Despite trade liberalization efforts made by Eurasian countries, the export structure of the region shows significant levels of concentration across export destinations. To shed light on this observation, this research analyzes trade policy barriers in Eurasia, East Asia and the Pacific, and the European Union. Using the most recent data from sources including the World Trade Organization, the United Nations, and the World Bank – including the Overall Trade Restrictiveness Indices, the Services Trade Restrictions Database, and the Temporary Trade Barriers Database – the role of tariffs, non-tariff measures, temporary trade barriers, trade agreements, and trade barriers in services are explored to explain the lack of diversification by destination. Several conclusions can be drawn from the analysis. First, China, Korea, and Japan, as well as the European Union, impose high levels of protection on products of animal origin, which may explain the lack of Eurasian export diversification toward the East Asia and the Pacific and the European Union regions. It also highlights the potential benefits of diversifying the structure of production in Eurasia toward more sophisticated and technologically intensive goods. Second, the East Asia and the Pacific region (especially China) appears to be more protectionist than the European Union, suggesting a greater challenge for Eurasian countries in diversifying exports to the destination. And third, few or no regional trade agreements exist between Eurasian countries and countries in the European Union or East Asia and the Pacific.





Physical description




  • World Bank Group, USA
  • World Bank Group, USA


  • Amiti M., Konings J. (2005) Trade liberalization, intermediate inputs, and productivity: evidence from Indonesia (IMF Working Paper No. WP/05/146). Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.
  • Arnold J., Javorcik B., Lipscomb M., Mattoo A. (2012) Services reform and manufacturing performance: evidence from India (Policy Research Working Paper No. 5948). Washington, DC: World Bank.
  • Asian Development Bank (2006) Central Asia: increasing gains from trade through regional cooperation in trade policy, transport, and customs transit. Manila, Philippines.
  • Baldwin J.R., Gu W. (2004) Trade liberalization: export-market participation, productivity growth, and innovation.” Oxford Review of Economic Policy 29(3), pp. 372–392.
  • Bas M. (2013) Does services liberalization affect manufacturing firms’ export performance? evidence from India (Working Paper 2013-17). Paris: CEPII.
  • Berulava G. (2011) Services inputs and export performance of manufacturing firms in transition economies (Working Paper Series). Russia: EERC.
  • Besedina E. (2015) Technical barriers to trade and SPS measures and export dynamics (Working Paper 842). Oslo: Norwegian Institute of International Affairs.
  • Borchert I. (2007) Preferential trade, sunk costs, and the path-dependent expansion of exports (Department of Economics Working Paper). Switzerland: University of St. Gallen.
  • Borchert I., Gootiiz B., Mattoo A. (2012a) Guide to the Services Trade Restrictions Database (Policy Research Working Paper No. 6108). Washington, DC: World Bank.
  • Borchert I., Gootiiz B., Mattoo A. (2012b) Policy barriers to international trade in services: new empirical evidence. (Policy Research Working Paper No. 6109). Washington, DC: World Bank.
  • Bown C. (2012) Emerging economies and the emergence of South-South protectionism (Policy Research Working Paper No. 6162). Washington, DC: World Bank.
  • Cadot O., Malouche M., Sàez S. (2012) Streamlining non-tariff measures: a toolkit for policy makers. Washington, DC: World Bank.
  • Dabaere P., Mostashari S. (2010) Do tariffs matter for the extensive margin of international trade? an empirical analysis. Journal of International Economics 81(2), pp. 163–169.
  • Ferreira P.C., Rossi J.L. (2003) New evidence from Brazil on trade liberalization and productivity growth.” International Economic Review 44(4), pp. 1383-1405.
  • Gillson I., Reyes J.D. (2011) Harnessing regional integration for trade and growth in Central Asia (International Trade Department). Washington, DC: World Bank.
  • Gourdon J., Nicita A. (2012) NTMs: interpreting the new data. In O. Cadot, M. Malouch (Eds.), Non-tariff measures: a fresh look at trade policy’s new frontier (pp. 57–80). London/Washington, DC: Center for Economic Policy Research/World Bank.
  • Goldberg P.K., Khandelwal A.K., Pavcnik N., Topalova P. (2010) Imported intermediate inputs and domestic product growth: evidence from India. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 125(4), pp. 1727–1767.
  • Hillberry R.H., McDaniel C.A. (2002) A decomposition of North American trade growth since NAFTA (Working Paper No. 2002-12-A). Washington, DC: U.S. International Trade Commission.
  • Kee H.L., Nicita A., Olarreaga M. (2009) Estimating trade restrictiveness indices. The Economic Journal 119, pp. 172–199.
  • Kehoe T., Ruhl K.J. (2002) How important is the new goods margin in international trade? (Staff Report No. 324). Minneapolis, MN: Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
  • Mukerji P. (2009) “Trade liberalization and the extensive margin. Scottish Journal of Political Economy 56, pp. 141–166.
  • Pavcnik N. (2002) Trade liberalization, exit and productivity improvements: evidence from Chilean plants. Review of Economic Studies 69(1), pp. 245–276.
  • Rodriguez-Clare A., Klenow P. (1997) Quantifying variety gains from trade liberalization (Graduate School of Business Working Paper) Chicago: University of Chicago.
  • Sandrey R., Seventer D.V. (2004) Has the New Zealand/Australian Closer Economic Relationship (CER) been trade widening or deepening (Forum Paper 2004)? Somerset West, South Africa: African Development and Poverty Reduction: The Macro-Micro Linkages.
  • Schor A. (2004) Heterogeneous productivity response to tariff reduction: evidence from Brazilian manufacturing firms. Journal of Development Economics 75(2), pp. 373–396.
  • Topalova P., Khandelwal A. (2011) Trade liberalization and firm productivity: the case of India. Review of Economics and Statistics 93(3), pp. 995–1009.
  • Trefler D. (2004) The long and short of the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement. The American Economic Review 94(4), pp. 870–895.
  • Tybout J.R., Westbrook M.D. (1995) Trade liberalization and the dimensions of the efficiency change in Mexican manufacturing industries. Journal of International Economics (39), pp. 53–78.
  • World Bank (2011) Russia and Central Asia: win-win approaches in trade integration (ECSPE and the Eurasian Development Bank Center for Integration). Washington, DC: World Bank.

Document Type

Publication order reference



YADDA identifier

JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.