Russian Domestic Trade: Applying the Gravity Model for Rail Cargo Flows

A. O. Tomaev; A. S. Kaukin; P. N. Pavlov

doi:10.18288/1994-5124-2020-5-60-89

Russian Domestic Trade: Applying the Gravity Model for Rail Cargo Flows

A. O. Tomaev, A. S. Kaukin, P. N. Pavlov

https://doi.org/10.18288/1994-5124-2020-5-60-89

Full Text:

PDF (Rus)

Generate QR code

Abstract

This article uses the gravity model to explain the trade flows between the regions of Russia. The data used contains information on all rail freight flows in tonnes for the period 2012–2016. The authors discuss the assumptions that make the gravity model applicable for trade by one mode of transport. For the purpose of correct estimation of the gravity equation, the special method of obtaining trade values in rubles was developed. The coefficients of distance and gross regional products are close to the results of previous studies on international and domestic trade. Along with the distance factor, the average rail tariff variable was included in the model. The significance of the coefficients of both variables has confirmed that trade flows are determined not only by transport costs, but by other trade costs, too. The results suggest that the export volume of the sending region proportional to its output is positively related to the volume of bilateral domestic trade flows. Accounting for regional fixed effects has not changed the coefficients of distance and average tariffs significantly, indicating the robustness of the estimates. No proof has been found for the impact of infrastructure on trade. An institutional factor that can negatively affect the trade volume is the level of corruption in the recipient region.

Keywords

domestic trade, freight flows, railway transport, gravity equation, institutional quality, transport infrastructure.

JEL: F14, C23, R41

About the Authors

A. O. Tomaev

Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration
Russian Federation

Alexander O. Tomaev

82, Vernadskogo pr., Moscow, 119571

A. S. Kaukin

Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration; Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy
Russian Federation

Andrey S. Kaukin, Cand. Sci. (Econ.)

82, Vernadskogo pr., Moscow, 119571

3–5, Gazetnyy per., Moscow, 125009

P. N. Pavlov

Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration
Russian Federation

Pavel N. Pavlov

82, Vernadskogo pr., Moscow, 119571

References

1. Gusev A. Oslablennaya ekonomicheskaya integratsiya regionov Rossii - ugroza territorial’noy tselostnosti strany [Weakened Economic Integration of Russian Regions - A Threat to the Country’s Territorial Integrity]. Obshchestvo i ekonomika [Society and Economics], 2011, no. 10, pp. 50-66.

2. Kaukin A. S. Teoreticheskie aspekty formirovaniya prostranstvennogo raspredeleniya torgovykh potokov (prostranstvennaya gravitatsionnaya model’ vneshney torgovli): avtoref. dis. … kand. ekon. nauk [Theoretical Aspects of Formation of Trade Flows’ Spatial Distribution (Spatial Gravity Model of Foreign Trade): PhD Thesis]. Moscow, 2013.

3. Kaukin A., Idrisov G. Gravitatsionnaya model’ vneshney torgovli Rossii: sluchai bol’shoy po ploshchadi strany s protyazhennoy granitsey [The Gravity Model of Russian Foreign Trade: Case of a Country with Large Area and Long Border]. Ekonomicheskaya politika [Economic Policy], 2013, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 133-154.

4. Mishura A. V. Otsenka gravitatsionnykh modeley mezhregional’noy torgovli monopolisticheski konkurentnymi tovarami v Rossii [The Estimation of Gravity Models of Russian Interregional Trade in Monopolistically Competitive Goods]. Mir ekonomiki i upravleniya [The World of Economics and Management], 2012, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 52-58.

5. Mogilat A., Salnikov V. Otsenka potentsiala vzaimnoy torgovli stran Edinogo ekonomicheskogo prostranstva pri pomoshchi gravitatsionnoy modeli torgovli mezhdu regionami Rossii [Trade Effects Estimation for the Case of Eurasian Economic Space Countries: Application of Regional Gravity Model]. Zhurnal Novoy ekonomicheskoy assotsiatsii [Jour-nal of the New Economic Association], 2015, no. 3(27), pp. 80-108.

6. Abe K., Wilson J. S. Governance, Corruption, and Trade in the Asia Pacific Region. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, no. WPS4731, 2008.

7. Anderson J. E. A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation. American Economic Review, 1979, vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 106-116.

8. Anderson J. E., Van Wincoop E. Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to the Border Puzzle. American Economic Review, 2003, vol. 93, no. 1, pp. 170-192.

9. Anderson M., Smith S. Do National Borders Really Matter? Canada-US Regional Trade Reconsidered. Review of International Economics, 1999, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 219-227.

10. Annabi N., Khondker B., Raihan S., Cockburn J., Decaluwe B. Implications of WTO Agreements and Unilateral Trade Policy Reforms for Poverty in Bangladesh: Short Versus Long-Run Impacts. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, no. 3976, 2006.

11. Baier S. L., Bergstrand J. H. Bonus Vetus OLS: A Simple Method for Approximating International Trade-Cost Effects Using the Gravity Equation. Journal of International Economics, 2009, vol. 77, no. 1, pp. 77-85.

12. Bougheas S., Demetriades P. O., Morgenroth E. L. W. Infrastructure, Transport Costs and Trade. Journal of International Economics, 1999, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 169-189.

13. Chaney T. The Gravity Equation in International Trade: An Explanation. Journal of Political Economy, 2018, vol. 126, no. 1, pp. 150-177.

14. Cornia G. The Impact of Liberalisation and Globalisation on Income Inequality in Developing and Transitional Economies. CESifo Working Paper Series, no. 843, 2003.

15. De Jong E., Bogmans C. Does Corruption Discourage International Trade? European Journal of Political Economy, 2011, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 385-398.

16. Dornbusch R., Fischer S., Samuelson P. A. Comparative Advantage, Trade, and Payments in a Ricardian Model with a Continuum of Goods. American Economic Review, 1977, vol. 67, no. 5, pp. 823-839.

17. Francois J., Manchin M. Institutions, Infrastructure, and Trade. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, no. 4152, 2007.

18. Helble M. Border Effect Estimates for France and Germany Combining International Trade and Intranational Transport Flows. Review of World Economics, 2007, vol. 143, no. 3, pp. 433-463.

19. Laurino A., Ramella F., Beria P. The Economic Regulation of Railway Networks: A World-wide Survey. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 2015, vol. 77(C), pp. 202-212.

20. Leamer E. E. The Commodity Composition of International Trade in Manufactures: An Empirical Analysis. Oxford Economic Papers, 1974, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 350-374.

21. Limão N., Venables A. J. Infrastructure, Geographical Disadvantage, Transport Costs, and Trade. World Bank Economic Review, 2001, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 451-479.

22. Louhela T. Estimation of Interregional Trade for Finnish Regions in 1996 and 2002 - Freight Flow and Gravity Approaches. European Regional Science Association Conference Papers, no. 114, 2006.

23. Magalhães M. T. Spatial Coverage Index for Assessing National and Regional Transportation Infrastructures. Journal of Transport Geography, 2016, vol. 56, pp. 53-61.

24. McCallum J. National Borders Matter: Canada-U.S. Regional Trade Patterns. American Economic Review, 1995, vol. 85, no. 3, pp. 615-623.

25. Nordås H. K., Piermartini R. Infrastructure and Trade. World Trade Organization, Staff Working Paper, 2004.

26. Pittman R. The Freight Railways of the Former Soviet Union, Twenty Years on: Reforms Lose Steam. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 2013, vol. 6, pp. 99-115.

27. Portugal-Perez A., Wilson J. S. Export Performance and Trade Facilitation Reform: Hard and Soft Infrastructure. World Development, 2012, vol. 40, no. 7, pp. 1295-1307.

28. Santos Silva J. S., Tenreyro S. The Log of Gravity. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 2006, vol. 88, no. 4, pp. 641-658.

29. Slack B. Intermodal Transportation in North America and the Development of Inland Load Centers. The Professional Geographer, 1990, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 72-83.

30. Tinbergen J. Shaping the World Economy. N. Y., The Twentieth Century Fund, 1962.

31. Wolf H. C. Intranational Home Bias in Trade. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 2000, vol. 82, no. 4, pp. 555-563.

Review

For citations:

Tomaev A.O., Kaukin A.S., Pavlov P.N. Russian Domestic Trade: Applying the Gravity Model for Rail Cargo Flows. Economic Policy. 2020;15(5):60-89. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18288/1994-5124-2020-5-60-89

JATS XML