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

PL EN


2017 | 3/2017 (70), t.2 | 148-166

Article title

The European Union’s Trade Relations with Brazil in 2004–2015

Content

Title variants

PL
Stosunki handlowe Unii Europejskiej z Brazylią w latach 2004–2015

Languages of publication

Abstracts

PL
Obroty handlowe Brazylii z UE w latach 2004–2008 wzrastały, odzwierciedlając rosnącą rolę Brazylii w gospodarce światowej. Jednak od globalnego kryzysu gospodarczego stopy wzrostu zmniejszyły się, a bilateralne obroty zaczęły spadać. W latach 2004–2015 bilans handlowy UE z Brazylią miał przeważnie charakter deficytu, a struktura wzajemnego handlu była zbliżona do struktury całkowitego handlu obu partnerów. Przedmiotem analizy są przepływy handlowe i ich saldo oraz główne czynniki wpływające na wzajemne obroty. Oprócz koniunktury gospodarczej największe znaczenie miały światowe ceny surowców oraz tendencje protekcjonistyczne w brazylijskiej polityce handlowej. Istnieje znaczny potencjał rozwojowy w bilateralnych stosunkach handlowych UE–Brazylia, ale wzrost obrotów będzie zależał od poprawy reguł wzajemnego handlu oraz wynegocjowania bardziej korzystnych warunków dostępu do rynków, dotyczy to zwłaszcza rynku Brazylii.
EN
Brazil’s trade with the EU has been increasing, reflecting the growing role of Brazil in the world economy in 2004–2008. However, since the global economic crisis the growth rates have slowed down and bilateral trade flows have been declining. During 2004–2015, the EU trade balance with Brazil was mostly deficit and trade patterns were similar to each partner’s general merchandise structure. The paper contains an analysis of EU-Brazil trade flows and balance as well as points to main factors contributing to trade development. Apart from economic conditions in the EU and Brazil, main factors affecting bilateral trade were: world prices of primary products and protectionist tendencies in Brazil’s trade policy. There is still much growth potential when it comes to bilateral EU–Brazil trade, but whether it will be realized depends on improving trade rules and negotiating more favourable access to each other’s markets, especially to Brazil’s market.

Year

Pages

148-166

Physical description

Dates

published
2017

Contributors

author
  • Katedra Gospodarki Światowej i Integracji Europejskiej, Wydział Ekonomiczny UMCS
  • Katedra Gospodarki Światowej i Integracji Europejskiej, Wydział Ekonomiczny UMCS

References

  • Amiti, M. and Konings, J. (2007). Trade liberalization, intermediate inputs, and productivity: Evidence from Indonesia. American Economic Review, (97), 1611–1638, https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.97.5.1611.
  • European Commission. (2016a). Report on trade and investment barriers and protectionist trends 1 July 2014 – 31 December 2015, COM(2016) 406 final. Brussels: European Commission.
  • European Commission. (2016b). 13th Report. Overview of third country trade defence actions against the European Union for the year 2015, COM(2016) 392 final. Brussels: European Commission.
  • European Commission. (2017). European Union, trade in goods with Brazil. Brussels: European Commission.
  • Eurostat. (2017a). Foreign direct investment between the European Union and BRIC. Retrieved from: ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/pdfscache/35347.pdf (20.05.2017).
  • Eurostat. (2017b). Statistical Database. Retrieved from: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database (20.05.2017).
  • Freund C. (2016). The global trade slowdown and secular stagnation. Retrieved from: https://piie.com/blogs/trade-investment-policy-watch/global-trade-slowdown-and-secular-stagnation (20.05.2017).
  • GED. (2014). Brazil and Germany: A 21st-century relationship. Opportunities in trade, investment and finance. Gütersloh: Global Economic Dynamics.
  • Grossman, G. and Helpman, E. (1991). Innovation and growth in the global economy. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  • IMF. (2017). World Economic Outlook Database April 2017. Retrieved from: http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2017/01/weodata/index.aspx (20.05.2017).
  • Johansson, Å. and Olaberria, E. (2014). Long-term patterns of trade and specialisation. OECD Economics Department Working Papers, (1136), http://doi.org/10.1787/5jz158tbddbr-en.
  • Limão, N. and Venables, A.J. (2001). Infrastructure, geographical disadvantage, transport costs, and trade. World Bank Economic Review, (15), https://doi.org/10.1093/wber/15.3.451
  • Melitz, M.J. (2003). The impact of trade on intra-industry reallocations and aggregate industry productivity. Econometrica, (71), 1695–1725, http://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0262.00467.
  • Mendes, R.C. (2012). Trade: Brazil’s new protectionist agenda. Americas Quarterly. Retrieved from: http://www.americasquarterly.org/node/3288 (20.05.2017).
  • Mucha-Leszko, B. (2016). Przyczyny słabego ożywienia koniunktury gospodarczej w strefie euro w świetle hipotezy o nowej sekularnej stagnacji. Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu, (449), 436–449, http://doi.org/10.15611/pn.2016.449.39.
  • Muriel, B. and Terra, C. (2009). Sources of comparative advantages in Brazil. Review of Development Economics, (1), 15–27, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-9361.2008.00493.x.
  • OECD. (2015). Economic surveys: Brazil 2015. Paris: OECD, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/eco_surveys-bra-2015-en.
  • OECD. (2017). Statistics on trade in value added. Retrieved from: http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/trade/data/oecd-wto-statistics-on-trade-in-value-added_tiva-data-en (20.05.2017).
  • Paiva, G. (2010). Brazil infrastructure: Paving the way. Morgan Stanley Blue Paper, 5 May.
  • Summers, L. (2016). The age of secular stagnation. What it is and what to do about it. Foreign Affairs. Retrieved from: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2016-02-15/age-secular-stagnation (20.05.2017).
  • The Conference Board. (2017). Total Economy Database. Retrieved from: https://www.conference-board.org/data/economydatabase/ (20.05.2017).
  • UNCTAD. (2017). UNCTADStat. Retrieved from: http://unctadstat.unctad.org/(20.05.2017).
  • WEF. (2016). The global competitiveness report 2016–2017. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
  • WTO. (2016). World trade statistical review 2016. Geneva: World Trade Organization.

Document Type

Publication order reference

Identifiers

Biblioteka Nauki
525435

YADDA identifier

bwmeta1.element.ojs-issn-1644-9584-year-2017-issue-3_2017__70___t_2-article-cb9f2a7b-c2cc-339b-b207-2f09a1f45ebd
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.