Accounting for intermediates: Production sharing and trade in value added

We combine input–output and bilateral trade data to compute the value added content of bilateral trade. The ratio of value added to gross exports (VAX ratio) is a measure of the intensity of production sharing. Across countries, export composition drives VAX ratios, with exporters of Manufactures ha...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of international economics Vol. 86; no. 2; pp. 224 - 236
Main Authors Johnson, Robert C., Noguera, Guillermo
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Amsterdam Elsevier B.V 01.03.2012
Elsevier Sequoia S.A
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:We combine input–output and bilateral trade data to compute the value added content of bilateral trade. The ratio of value added to gross exports (VAX ratio) is a measure of the intensity of production sharing. Across countries, export composition drives VAX ratios, with exporters of Manufactures having lower ratios. Across sectors, the VAX ratio for Manufactures is low relative to Services, primarily because Services are used as an intermediate to produce manufacturing exports. Across bilateral partners, VAX ratios vary widely and contain information on both bilateral and triangular production chains. We document specifically that bilateral production linkages, not variation in the composition of exports, drive variation in bilateral VAX ratios. Finally, bilateral imbalances measured in value added differ from gross trade imbalances. Most prominently, the U.S.–China imbalance in 2004 is 30–40% smaller when measured in value added. ► We estimate the value added content of trade using a global input–output framework. ► The aggregate value added to export ratio for the median country is roughly 70%. ► Bilateral ratios vary due to production sharing patterns, not export composition. ► Bilateral value added trade imbalances differ from gross trade imbalances. ► The U.S.–China value added imbalance is 30–40% smaller than the gross imbalance.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ISSN:0022-1996
1873-0353
DOI:10.1016/j.jinteco.2011.10.003