Revealed comparative advantages in terms of added value: data for Russia


Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The paper considers the methodological aspects of calculating the index of revealed comparative advantages (Balassa index) for the needs of the theory of global value chains. In the event of economic shocks, knowledge of the geographic origin of value added in exports helps to consider comprehensively the issue of diversification of partners in global value chains (GVCs) and contributes to faster policy decision-making, early recovery or replacement of affected links in global value chains. For the first time, comparative advantage indices were calculated for sectors of the Russian economy in terms of value added rather than gross exports. This allowed obtaining the more objective data about the presence of revealed comparative advantages in the GVC era. The study uses ADB MRIO data on value-added trade for 2011 and 2021, from which the RCAf (for forward links in GVCs) and RCAb (for backward links in GVCs) indices are calculated. Using the World Bank methodology, indices of direct and reverse participation in GVCs were calculated. The results obtained show the presence of comparative advantages in both the mining and manufacturing sectors of the Russian economy. At the same time, comparative advantage has been lost in some service sectors, such as the Sales, Maintenance, and Repair of Motor Vehicles and Motorcycles sector. In industrial sectors, comparative advantages tend to increase, especially in the sectors of extraction of minerals, timber, and metals.

About the authors

Mikhail Vyacheslavovich Shatunov

St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg

Author for correspondence.
Email: shmihhail@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0009-0005-2572-0594

postgraduate student

Russian Federation

References

  1. Amador J., Cabral S. Global Value Chains: A Survey of Drivers and Measures. Journal of Economic Surveys, 2016, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 278–301. doi: 10.1111/joes.12097.
  2. Antràs P. Conceptual Aspects of Global Value Chains. The World Bank Economic Review, 2020, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 551–574. doi: 10.1093/wber/lhaa006.
  3. Goldberg P.K., Khandelwal A.K., Topalova P., Pavcnik N. Imported Intermediate Inputs and Domestic Product Growth: Evidence from India. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2010, vol. 125, no. 4, pp. 1727–1767.
  4. Balassa B. Trade liberalization and “revealed” comparative advantage. The Manchester School, 1965, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 99–123. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9957.1965.tb00050.x.
  5. Koopman R., Powers W., Wang Zhi, Wei Shang-Jin. Give credit where credit is due: tracing value added in global production Chains: Working papers series (National Bureau of Economic Research) no. 16426. 2010. 58 p. doi: 10.3386/w16426.
  6. Koopman R., Wang Zhi, Wei Shang-Jin. Tracing Value-Added and Double Counting in Gross Exports. American Economic Review, 2014, vol. 104, no. 2, pp. 459–494. doi: 10.1257/AER.104.2.459.
  7. Miroudot S., Cadestin C. Services in Global Value Chains: Trade patterns and gains from specialization: OECD Trade Policy Papers no. 208. Paris, OECD Publ., 2017. 48 p. doi: 10.1787/06420077-en.
  8. Borin A., Mancini M. Follow the value added: bilateral gross export accounting. Bank of Italy Temi di Discussione (Working Paper), 2015, no. 1026, pp. 1–53. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2722439.
  9. Borin A., Mancini M. Measuring what matters in global value chains and value-added trade: Policy Research Working Paper no. 8804. Washington, World Bank Publ., 2019. 66 p. doi: 10.1596/1813-9450-8804.
  10. Dosi G., Riccio F., Virgillito M.E. Varieties of deindustrialization and patterns of diversification: why microchips are not potato chips. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 2021, vol. 57, pp. 182–202. doi: 10.1016/j.strueco.2021.01.009.
  11. Hausmann R., Hidalgo C.A. The network structure of economic output. Journal of Economic Growth, 2011, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 309–342. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1101.1707.
  12. Hausmann R., Hwang J., Rodrik D. What you export matters. Journal of Economic Growth, 2007, no. 12, pp. 1–25. doi: 10.1007/s10887-006-9009-4.
  13. Coveri A., Cozza C., Nascia L., Zanfei A. Supply chain contagion and the role of industrial policy. Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, 2020, no. 47, pp. 467–482. doi: 10.1007/s40812-020-00167-6.
  14. Giammetti R., Papi L., Teobaldelli D., Ticchi D. The Italian value chain in the pandemic: the input–output impact of Covid-19 lockdown. Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, 2020, no. 47, pp. 483–497. doi: 10.1007/s40812-020-00164-9.
  15. Strange R. The 2020 Covid-19 pandemic and global value chains. Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, 2020, no. 47, pp. 455–465. doi: 10.1007/s40812-020-00162-x.
  16. Gereffi G., Pananond P., Pedersen T. Resilience decoded: the role of firms, global value chains, and the state in COVID-19 Medical Supplies. California Management Review, 2022, vol. 64, no. 2, pp. 46–70. doi: 10.1177/00081256211069420.
  17. Buckley P.J., Strange R., Timmer M.P., de Vries G.J. Catching-up in the global factory: Analysis and policy implications. Journal of International Business Policy, 2020, no. 3, pp. 79–106. doi: 10.1057/s42214-020-00047-9.
  18. Coveri A., Zanfei A. Who wins the race for knowledge-based competitiveness? Comparing European and North American FDI patterns. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 2022, no. 48, pp. 292–330. doi: 10.1007/s10961-021-09911-z.
  19. Aghion P.W., Bergeaud A., Lequen M., Melitz M.J. The impact of exports on innovation: theory and evidence: Banque de France Working Paper no. 24600. 2018. 58 p. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3171084.
  20. Tian K., Dietzenbacher E., Jong-A-Pin R. Global value chain participation and its impact on industrial upgrading. The World Economy, 2022, vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 1362–1385. doi: 10.1111/twec.13209.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c)



This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies