Search

This paper overviews theoretical and empirical contributions that study political borders from an economic perspective. It reviews theories of the number and size of nations focused on the trade-off between economies of scale in public-good provision and heterogeneity of preferences over public policies as well as on the factors affecting this trade-off, such as democratization, international openness, and conflict. It also reviews studies of political integration and disintegration that focus on economic inequality, redistribution policies, and the geographical distribution of resources. Finally, the paper discusses recent empirical studies that shed light on the relations among heterogeneity, conflict, and borders. This line of research is part of a growing literature on the interplay between cultural variables and economic and political outcomes.

This analysis employs cointegration methods and semiparametric regression in order to assess the integration of maize markets and the factors determining national and cross-national transmission of price signals in Sub-Saharan Africa. We use a rich dataset of 16 series of wholesale maize prices between 2000 and 2008 for Kenya, Tanzanian and Uganda. Distance is shown to have a significant nonlinear impact on the transmission of information - modelled using a semi-parametric partially linear model. Border effects are found to be heterogeneous. The empirical results provide strong evidence that the Tanzanian market is isolated from the rest of East Africa and internally fragmented.

Many studies have found that international borders represent large barriers to trade. But how do international borders compare to domestic border barriers? We investigate international and domestic border barriers in a unified framework. We consider a unique data set of exports from individual U.S. states to foreign countries and combine it with trade flows within and between U.S. states. After controlling for distance and country size, we find that relative to state-to-state trade, crossing an individual U.S. state's domestic border entails a larger trade barrier than crossing the international U.S. border. This finding highlights the concentration of trade flows at the local level and the importance of factors such as informational barriers and transportation costs even for the relatively short distances associated with state-to-state trade.

Why do borders still matter for economic activity? The reunification of Germany in 1990 provides a unique natural experiment for examining the effect of political borders on trade both in the cross-section and over time. With the fall of the Berlin Wall and the rapid formation of a political and economic union, strong and strictly enforced administrative barriers to trade between East Germany and West Germany were eliminated completely within a very short period of time. The evolution of intra-German trade flows after reunification then provides new insights for both the globalization and border effects literatures. Our estimation results show a remarkable persistence in intra-German trade patterns along the former East-West border; political integration is not rapidly followed by economic integration. Instead, we estimate that it takes at least one generation (between 33 and 40 years or more) to remove the impact of political borders on trade. This finding strongly suggests that border effects are neither statistical artefacts nor mainly driven by administrative or red tape” barriers to trade, but arise from economic fundamentals.

This paper uses a gravity framework to investigate the effects of distance as well as subnational and national borders in knowledge spillovers. Drawing on the NBER Patent Citations Database, we examine patent citations data at metropolitan level within the U.S. and the 38 largest patent-cited countries outside the U.S. We present 3 key findings: First, we find strong subnational localization effects at the Metropolitan Statistical Area and state levels: more than 90% of intranational border effects stem from the metropolitan level rather than state. Second, border and distance effects decrease with the age of cited patent, which implies that new knowledge faces the largest barriers to diffusion. However, over time, border and distance effects are interestingly increasing. Finally, we find that (assignee) self-citations and aggregation bias are two sources of overestimated aggregate border effects of knowledge spillovers. While self-citations are only 11% of total citations, they account for approximately 50% of MSA and national border effects.

This paper reviews the economics approach to conflict and national borders. The paper (a) provides a summary of ideas and concepts from the economics literature on the size of nations; (b) illustrates them within a simple analytical framework where populations fight over borders and resources, and may form non-aggression pacts, military alliances, and political unions; and (c) discusses extensions and directions for further research.

Most FDI takes place between the developed countries, which suggests that the market-seeking motive is important for understanding FDI. However, given the stylized fact that trade barriers (e.g. transportation costs and financial barriers) have declined over the past 20 years, models that aim to explain market-seeking FDI tend to predict a decline in FDI. Neary (2008) offers two explanations for this puzzle: (1) the export platform motive (where firms gain access to an integrated market by investing in one of the integrated countries); (2) Neary's (2007) GOLE model, which explains cross-border mergers and acquisitions (this model is of interest since most FDI comes in the form of M&As). By using a gravity framework, where we also deal with the zero gravity problem , we confirm the predictions of the GOLE model.

A large literature on border effects in the wake of McCallum (1995) documents the massive impact of borders on trade. However, all these studies suffer from an identification problem. Border effects are usually identified from cross-sectional variation alone. We do not know how trade would change in response to a change in borders - the treatment effect of borders on trade - simply because trade flows across future borders are typically not documented. Nor can we rule out that there is reverse causation : that borders run along pre-existing trade patterns rather than shape trade flows. We exploit a natural experiment from history to explore this issue: the many dramatic border changes that were imposed and codified by the peace treaties in 1919 across Europe. We follow Ritschl and Wolf (2008) and implement Ashenfelter's difference-in-difference estimator in levels on a large, new data set on sub-national trade flows. This allows us to trace the effects of changing borders over time and produces two key results: first, new borders have a large effect on trade. However second, the treatment effects of borders tend to be significantly smaller than the pure cross-sectional effects. This is so, because most of the 1919 border changes followed a pattern of trade relations across the region that was clearly visible already before 1914. Borders shape trade, and trade shapes borders.