1 / 32

Foreign Languages and Trade

Foreign Languages and Trade. 2 nd FIW-Research Conference „International Economics“ Vienna University of Economics December 12, 2008. Introduction. Do languages affect trade? Easier communication  lower transaction costs  greater trade

ccotton
Télécharger la présentation

Foreign Languages and Trade

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Foreign Languages and Trade 2nd FIW-Research Conference „International Economics“Vienna University of EconomicsDecember 12, 2008

  2. Introduction • Do languages affect trade? • Easier communication  lower transaction costs  greater trade • Trade analysis (gravity model) typically accounts for common official language • E.g. Rose (2000): common language increases trade by 50%

  3. Introduction (cont’d) • Gravity models: official languages only • Dummy variables, not proficiency • Proficiency varies across countries • E.g. French in France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Canada,… • Other languages besides official ones matter too • Non-official indigenous languages • Foreign languages

  4. Introduction (cont’d) • Rauch (1999, 2001), Rauch and Trindade (2002), Bandyopadhyay, Coughlin and Wall (2008) • Ethnic-networks increase trade • Rauch and Trindade (2002): ethnic Chinese networks in SE Asia increase trade by at least 60%

  5. Introduction (cont’d) • Mélitz (2008) • Official and non-official indigenous languages • Language impact measured using dummy variables (if official or spoken by more than 20%) or communicative probability • Only indigenous languages (Ethnologue database)

  6. Our Contribution • First to study effect of native and foreign (learned) languages alike • Trade often relies on communication in non-native languages • Unique extensive dataset on language proficiency in the EU • Non-linearity • Old vs new Europe • Role of English

  7. Data • Special Eurobarometer 255: Europeans and their Languages, November - December 2005 • Nationally representative surveys; only EU nationals included • Mother’s tongue(s) and up to 3 other languages that they speak well enough to have a conversation • Self-assessed proficiency: basic, good, very good • Trade flows: 2001-07

  8. English (good/very good skills) French (good/very good skills)

  9. German (good/very good skills) Russian (good/very good skills)

  10. Spanish (good/very good skills) Italian (good/very good skills)

  11. Gravity Model • Gravity model methodology following Baldwin and Taglioni (2006) • Trade between i and j, Tijt, and output of i and j, yitand yjt,, measured in nominal US$ • Distance between i and j: dij • Common border and common history dummies: bijand fij

  12. Gravity Model (cont’d) • Common official-language dummies: Ldij • Communication probabilities: Pfij • Time-varying country dummies: • Country-specific time-invariant and time-varying omitted variables • Country-specific measurement problems

  13. Communicative Probability • Probability that two random individuals from two different countries speak the same language • English • Languages spoken by at least 10% of population in at least 3 countries • German, French, Russian • Languages spoken by at least 4% of population in at least 3 countries • Italian, Spanish, Hungarian, Swedish

  14. Communicative Probability

  15. Results: EU15 • Common official language and communicative probability raise trade • English especially important • Accounting for proficiency in English lowers official-language effect • French/German: weak/mixed results • Spanish/Italian/Swedish: seemingly strong effects • Most country pairs’ at/close to zero

  16. Results: EU 15

  17. Results: EU15, magnitude • Consider column (5) • Average effect in EU15: 25% increase due to English proficiency (22% average communicative probability) • UK-IRL trade increased 2.2 times because English is official language and 2.7 times because of English proficiency  5.8 fold increase overall • NL-S trade increased 1.7 times and NL-UK trade more than doubled

  18. Results: NMS/AC • English proficiency raises trade • Large coefficient estimate  but proficiency is relatively low • Average impact: 77% increase (11% average communicative probability) • German and Russian also significant • Average impact of German: 30%

  19. Results: NMS/AC

  20. Results: EU29 • Weaker results • English significant but impact less powerful than in either EU15 or NMS/AC • Average English proficiency (17%) raises trade by 11% • French not significant and German negative impact • Remaining languages significant

  21. Results: EU29

  22. Results: Discussion • Possible explanations for weaker EU29 results: • Heterogeneity: EU15 vs NMS/AC • Trade between EU15 and NMS/AC still below potential • Different political, economic and linguistic legacy • NMS/AC have not yet reached their new linguistic equilibrium • Effect of languages not linear

  23. Results: Non-linear Effect • Add squared communicative probability • Hump-shaped effect of English  diminishing returns • Peak at around 70% probability • Quadratic term not significant in NMS/AC and EU29 • French/German: weaker/negative effect • Other languages: quadratic terms not significant in NMS/AC and EU29 • Except Russian: U-shaped in NMS/AC

  24. Results: Non-linear Effect EU15

  25. Non-linear Effect: EU15

  26. Robustness: EU15 • Results potentially driven by outliers • Country pairs with especially high/low trade • Effect of English proficiency highest around 50th percentile (median regression) • Effect of foreign languages not due to outliers

  27. Results: EU 15, Quantile Regressions

  28. Results: EU 15, Quantile Regressions

  29. Conclusions • Language has a strong effect on trade • Countries with common official language trade more with each other • Proficiency in foreign languages also increases trade • Effects of languages different in EU15 and NMS/AC • Effect of languages seems non-linear (diminishing returns)

  30. Conclusions (cont’d) • Universal proficiency in English could raise trade up to 2.7 times (EU15) • Rose: monetary unions  2-3 fold increase in trade • Common currency costly (OCA theory) • Improving English proficiency does not require abandoning national languages • Large gains possible at little cost

  31. Position of German in CEECs?

More Related