The rapid growth of countries that opened their markets to international trade has led to an increase in the number of Regional Trade Agreements (RTAs). A number of countries have signed these agreements with their regional trade partners in order to reap the benefits of free trade. Such benefits include: trade stimulation, integrated markets, foreign exchange gains, and economic growth, to name just a few. The main objective of RTAs is to stimulate bilateral trade by integrating the markets of member states. However, RTAs have not achieved the same level of success globally. In some regions around the world, intra-bloc trade remains low post RTA ratification, especially in developing countries.
A review of the trade literature revealed a number of reasons for the failure of the regional economic integration model to stimulating bilateral trade. Such reasons include: inadequate economic policies; lack of administrative capacity and infrastructure; protectionist trade policies; political immaturity and instability; and border issues. However, according to trade literature, there is an argument that, in recent years, most of these factors have been taken care of, yet intra-bloc trade remains low. In a quest to provide more answers for this puzzle, trade researchers have identified risk, which is defined as a situation where there are multiple possible outcomes (with known probabilities), but the ultimate outcome is not known, as a possible answer to the low intra-bloc trade mystery.
Risk has also been identified as a key impediment to bilateral trade, especially between developing economies, where risk is inherent. However, investigations of the trade-risk nexus are still in their infancy, and are said to be flawed. Such investigations which have generally been done in developed countries have focused on the impact of one risk event on trade, in isolation. This approach is inadequate as risk is a multi-dimensional phenomenon with spill-over effects which require a more holistic approach to explore interdependencies between seemingly unrelated events. As such, there is still no framework for aggregating risk in the trade processes of an economy. This means therefore that the impact of risk on trade is still not yet fully understood. This also means that conclusions drawn from trade-risk studies involving developed countries could be misleading for developing countries because of the differences in underlying economic conditions.
This study, therefore, pursued two main objectives: (1) to develop a risk aggregation framework in the form of a composite risk index; and (2) to determine the impact of risk on bilateral trade. In pursuit of the first objective, this study, used the Southern African Customs Union (SACU) as a case study, and developed a framework for quantifying risk. The output of this framework was a composite risk indicator which measures the level of risk in an economy. To construct the composite risk index, this study adapted a framework used to construct other social indexes e.g. the human development index; environmental sustainability index; and disaster risk index. The results from this exercise showed that the SACU member states (Botswana, Eswatini, Lesotho, Namibia, and South Africa) had different levels of risk, as expected. The results also showed that Lesotho and Eswatini had higher risk, which was constant or increased over time. This implies that these countries were less resilient to risk, as they were not able to address the risk over time, probably due to the lack of resources. Botswana, Namibia and South Africa proved to be more resilient as their risk decreased over time. In pursuit of the second objective, this study augmented the gravity model with the constructed composite risk index to determine the impact of aggregate risk on bilateral trade flows.
This study addressed a number of issues around the gravity model related to; specification, and structural econometric concerns. Agriculture commodity trade data (from 2000 to 2018) was also preferred over aggregated trade data. From the results, it was found that imports increased, though marginally when the incidence of risky events increased. The analysis showed that a 10 per cent increase in risky events in the domestic economy increases imports by 0.65 per cent.
This result is probable because risk could potentially disrupt the production of goods and services by domestic producers. As such, domestic producers would be unable to meet domestic demand and, therefore, goods would have to be sourced from external markets. On the export side, risk was found to have quite a substantial negative impact. A 10 per cent increase in the incidence of risky events decreased bilateral trade by 10 per cent. This result is intuitive because risk in the domestic economy is expected to affect exports more than imports. This result was also expected because risky events in the domestic economy affect the production of goods. This means the exporting country would have fewer goods available to satisfy domestic demand and even fewer for export. According to the results, aggregate risk on the importing economy leads to an increase in bilateral trade, whereas it decreased bilateral trade on the exporting end. This means that risk is a major impediment for countries with export-promoting trade policies.
The policy implications are that, SACU member states need to build their individual and collective resilience through effective risk mitigation policies and strategies. SACU operates the common revenue pool (CRP), which is a form of risk mitigation, but it needs proper management. The CRP has a customs component which compensates Botswana, Eswatini, Lesotho, and Namibia for the trade diverting exploits of South Africa in the bloc. There is also a developmental component which is meant to fund developmental projects. The development component of the pool needs to be channelled towards infrastructural development to reduce transportation costs. This needs to be coupled with interventions that build the resilience of domestic producers since risk was found to impede exports. This would reduce the high dependence on the South Africa economy by the other countries in the SACU bloc. / Thesis (PhD (Agricultural Economics))--University of Pretoria, 2021. / African Economic Research Consortium (AERC) / Agricultural Economics, Extension and Rural Development / PhD (Agricultural Economics) / Unrestricted
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:up/oai:repository.up.ac.za:2263/78229 |
| Date | January 2021 |
| Creators | Mlipha, Skhumbuzo Samkelo Bryan |
| Contributors | Kalaba, Mmatlou W., ssbmlipha@gmail.com, Blignaut, C.S. |
| Publisher | University of Pretoria |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
| Rights | © 2019 University of Pretoria. All rights reserved. The copyright in this work vests in the University of Pretoria. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, without the prior written permission of the University of Pretoria. |
Page generated in 0.003 seconds