DOMINANT STRATEGIC TRADE POLICY

Authors

  • Valentin Melnik Department of Аpplied informatics and modeling, Pskov State University (RU)

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17770/etr2021vol2.6542

Keywords:

strategic trade policy, Nash equilibrium, tariffs, quotas, subsidies

Abstract

In implementing trade policy measures, governments usually select from a range of instruments including quotas, subsidies (explicit or implicit) and tariffs. In this paper we consider the potential gain of a government pursuing a two-part trade policy: an import license for entry, along with a per-unit tariff on imports. The model is a three-step game between home and foreign countries in the Cournot duopoly. The paper demonstrates that two-part trade policy is dominant.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

J. N. Bhagwati, “On the Equivalence of Teriffs and Quotas”, In Robert E. Baldwin et al. (ets), Trade, Growth and the Balance of Payments: Essays in Honor of Gottfried Haberler. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1965.

J. E. Anderson, The Relative Inefficiency of Quotas. The MIT Press, 1988.

K. Krishna, “Trade Restrictions as Facilitating Practices,” Journal of International Economics, vol. 26, pp. 251-270, 1989.

J. A. Brander and B. J. Spencer, “Export subsidies and market share rivalry,” Journal of International Economics, vol. 18, pp. 83-100, 1985.

J. H. Cassing and A.L. Hillman, “Political Influence Motives and the Choice between Tariffs and Quotas,” Journal of International Economics, vol. 19, pp. 279-290, 1985.

W. Y. Oi, “A Disneyland Dilemma: Two-Part Tariffs for a Mickey Mouse Monopoly,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 85, pp. 77-90, 1971.

L. Philips, The Economics of Price Discrimination. Cambridge University Press , 1983.

R. B. Wilson, Nonlinear Pricing. Oxford University Press, 1993.

T. S. Fuerst and K. H. Kim, “Two - Part Trade Policy under Imperfect Competition,” Review of International Economics vol. 5(1), pp. 63-71, 1997.

Downloads

Published

2021-06-17

How to Cite

[1]
V. Melnik, “DOMINANT STRATEGIC TRADE POLICY”, ETR, vol. 2, pp. 106–111, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.17770/etr2021vol2.6542.