In the section Articles
Title of the article Trade Liberalization between Russia and East Asian Countries
Pages 75-97
Author 1 Dmitriy Aleksandrovich Izotov
Candidate Economics, Senior Research Fellow.
Economic Research Institute FEB RAS
153 Tikhookeanskaya Street, Khabarovsk, Russia, 680042
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Abstract Based on the international statistics data the author estimates effects of trade liberalization between Russia and East Asian countries. The prospective niche markets in mutual trade and the impact of trade liberalization on the national economies were identified. Using a partial equilibrium model the author indicates the following positive trade effects for Russia and East Asia: trade creation effect prevails over trade diversion effect; general welfare and mutual trade of the countries tend to increase. The Russian economy has positive trade effects with all the East Asian countries, with the highest scale in the case of Sino-Russian trade. At the same time trade liberalization has following some costs for the Russian economy: a) the growing role of imports, mostly from China, compared to Russian exports; b) reduction of tariff revenues, which are four times higher for Russia, compared to East Asian countries; c) continued negative trade balance with the East Asian countries. The evaluation shows that the increase of Russian exports to East Asian countries is feasible only for certain commodity groups which determine marketable niches of specific East Asian countries; at the same time, Russia can import from East Asia a huge range of commodity groups. The study reveals that reduction in tariff measures and non- tariff restrictions will not lead to a massive increase in Russian exports and changing in its trade and geographical structure. On the basis of prolongation of short-term trends the author identifies long-term challenges and opportunities for the Russian economy from trade liberalization with East Asian countries. According to the estimation results, the author suggests that in the current environment of global trade liberalization the tariff measures become less significant as a tool for redistribution of commodity flows.
Code 339
DOI 10.14530/se.2015.4.075-097
Keywords export ♦ import ♦ import duty ♦ tariff measures ♦ non-tariff barriers ♦ partial equilibrium model ♦ trade creation effect ♦ trade diversion effect ♦ welfare effect ♦ tariff revenues ♦ Russia ♦ East Asia ♦ China ♦ Japan ♦ Republic of Korea ♦ ASEAN
Download SE.2015.4.075-097.Izotov.pdf
For citation Izotov D.A. Trade Liberalization between Russia and East Asian Countries. Prostranstvennaya Ekonomika = Spatial Economics, 2015, no. 4, pp. 75-97. DOI: 10.14530/se.2015.4.075-097. (In Russian).
References 1. Barriers against Russia. Available at: (accessed May 2015). (In Russian).
2. Idrisova V. Evaluation of Ad Valorem Equivalents of Non-Tariff Measures to Regulate Foreign Trade of the Russian Federation. Ekonomicheskaya Politika – Economic Policy, 2011, no. 2, pp.108–127. (In Russian).
3. Tochitskaya I. Consequences of Russia’s Accession to the WTO for Belarus Trade and Industries. German Economic Team. IPM Research Center. Analytical Report АЗ/01/2012. Minsk, 2012, 15 p. Available at: (accessed May 2015). (In Russian).
4. A Practical Guide to Trade Policy Analysis. WTO. 2012, 234 p. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
5. Ahmed S. India-Japan FTA in Goods: A Partial and General Equilibrium Analysis, 21 p. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
6. Alekseev A. An Application of a Computable General Equilibrium Model for the Estimation of Effects of the New Wave of the European Union Enlargement on the Russian Economy. Working Paper #BSP/2003/070. Moscow: New Economic School, 2003. 42 p.
7. Allen M. Review of the IMF’s Trade Restrictiveness Index (Background Paper to the Review of Fund Work on Trade). Prepared by the Policy Development and Review Department, 2005, 20 p. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
8. Amjadi A., Schuler P., Kuwahara H., Quadros S. World Integrated Trade Solution. User’s Manual. 2011, 230 p. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
9. Anderson J.A., van Wincoop E. Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to the Border Puzzle. American Economic Review, 2003, vol. 93, no. 1, pp. 170–192. DOI: 10.1257/000282803321455214
10. Armington P. A Theory of Demand for Products Distinguished by Place of Production. IMF Staff Paper, 1969, vol. 16, pp. 159–176. DOI: 10.2307/3866403
11. Choudhry S., Kallummal M., Varma P. Trade Creation and Trade Diversion in the India – Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement – A Sector Specific Analysis. Centre for WTO Studies, Indian Institute of Foreign Trade. Working Paper CWS/WP/200/11, 2013, 29 p. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
12. Classification of Non-Tariff Measures. UNCTAD. February 2012 Version. New York, Geneva, 2013, 48 p. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
13. Cline W. Enhancing the IMF’s Index of Trade Restrictiveness. Washington: Center for Global Development, 2003. Mimeo.
14. Cline W., Kawanabe N., Kronjo T.O., Williams T. Trade Negotiations in the Tokyo Round: A Quantitative Assessment. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1978, 314 p.
15. De Souza L.V. An Initial Estimation of the Economic Effects of the Creation of the EurAsEC Customs Union on Its Members. The World Bank, 2011, no. 47, 7 p. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
16. Fugazza M., Maur J.-С. Non-Tariff Barriers in a Non-Tariff World. Trade Analysis Branch, Division on International Trade in Goods and Services, and Commodities, UNCTAD, Geneva, 2006, 43 p. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
17. Harmonized System Codes (HS Code). Foreign Trade. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
18. Hovhanesian H., Manasyan H. South Caucasus – People’s Republic of China Bila-teral Free Trade Agreements: Why It Matters. ADB Working Paper Series on Regional Economic Integration, No. 125, 2014, 60 p. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
19. Incidence of Non-Ad Valorem Tariffs in Members’ Tariff Schedules and Possible Approaches to the Estimation of ad Valorem Equivalents. WTO Negotiating Group on Market Access, 2003, 21 p. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
20. I-TIP Goods: Integrated Analysis and Retrieval of Notified Non-Tariff Measures. World Trade Organization, 2012. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
21. Kee H.L., Nicita A., Olarreaga M. Estimating Trade Restrictiveness Indices. The Economic Journal, 2009, vol. 119, no. 534, pp. 172–199. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0297.2008.02209.x
22. Korea, China, Japan See Progress on Trilateral FTA. Asia News Network, 2013, 03 August. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
23. Laird S., Yeats A. The UNCTAD Trade Policy Simulation Model. A Note on the Methodology, Data and Uses. UNCTAD. Geneva, 1986, 38 р. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
24. Lee C.-S., Song B. Economic Effects of Russia’s Trade Liberalization: Russia’s WTO Accession and FTAs with EU and Korea. Journal of East Asian Economic Integration, 2008, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 251–286. DOI: 10.11644/KIEP.JEAI.2008.12.1.186
25. Linkins L.A., Arce H.M. Estimating Tariff Equivalents of Nontariff Barriers. Office of Economics Working Paper 94-06-A(r). U.S. International Trade Commission, 1994, 23 p. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
26. Mahmood H., Gul S. Evaluation of Trade Agreement in South Asia: A Case Study of Pakistan – Malaysia Free Trade Agreement (FTA), 2014, 26 р. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
27. Manchin M. The Economic Effects of a Russia-EU FTA. Tinbergen Institute. Discussion Paper TI 2004-131/2. 32 р. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
28. Market Access Map. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
29. Sen R., Srivastava S., Pacheco G. The Early Effects of Preferential Trade Agreements on Intra-Regional Trade within ASEAN+6 Members. Journal of Southeast Asian Economies, 2013, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 237–249. DOI: 10.1355/ae30-3a
30. Stawowy W. Calculation of Ad Valorem Equivalents of Non-Ad Valorem Tariffs – Methodology Notes. Draft Document. UNCTAD, 2001, 11 p. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
31. Thailand’s Free Trade Agreements. Bureau of Trade Information Management. FTA Unit Section, 2014. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
32. The New Eurasian Economic Union – A China FTA in the Offing? China Briefing, 2015. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
33. Thomy B., Tularam G.A., Siriwardana M. Partial Equilibrium Analysis to Determine the Impacts of a Southern African Customs Union-European Union Economic Partnership Agreement on Botswana’s Imports. American Journal of Economics and Business Administration, 2013, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–14. DOI: 10.3844/ajebasp.2013.1.14
34. UNCTADstat. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
35. Veeramani C., Saini G.K. Impact of ASEAN-India Preferential Trade Agreement on Plantation Commodities: A Simulation Analysis. Economic & Political Weekly, 2011, vol. XIVI, no. 10, pp. 83–92.
36. Vietnam Signs Free Trade Agreement with Russian-Led Economic Union. The Moscow Times, 2015, 29 May. Available at: (accessed May 2015).
37. Viner J. The Customs Union Issue. Oxford University Press, 2014, 256 p.
38. Zhu E. The Case for Free Trade Agreements: Historical Perspectives and a Projection for China, Japan, and Korea. Stanford University, Department of Economics, 2013, 78 p. Available at: (accessed May 2015).

ISSN (Print) 1815-9834
ISSN (Online) 2587-5957

Minakir Pavel Aleksandrovich,
Tel.: +7 (4212) 725-225,
Fax: +7 (4212) 225-916,
Samokhina Lyudmila, Executive Editor
Tel.: +7 (4212) 226-053
Fax: +7 (4212) 225-916,
Tel.: +7 (4212) 226-053,
Fax: +7 (4212) 225-916,
To Editorial Staff of “Spatial Economics”
Economic Research Institute FEB RAS
153 Tikhookeanskaya St., Khabarovsk, RUSSIA, 680042



Creative Commons License
Unless otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License