What Do We Really Know about Protection before the Great Depression: Evidence from Italy

Giovanni Federico, Michelangelo Vasta

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

The impact of protection on economic growth has enjoyed a revival in recent times, with the publication of a number of comparative quantitative papers. They all share a common weakness: they measure protection as the ratio of custom revenues to import value, which biases results if demand for imports is not perfectly inelastic. In this article, we show that the measure of protection matters. We estimate the James Anderson and Peter Neary (2005) Trade Restrictiveness Index for Italy from unification to the Great Depression. We suggest a different interpretation of some key moments of Italian trade policy and we show that the aggregate welfare losses were small in the long run and mostly related to protection on sugar in the 1880s and 1890s. We document that using different measures of protection affects results of the causal relation between trade policy on economic growth in Italy and in the United States. Accordingly, we argue that a systematic re-estimating of protection in the economic history of trade policy is needed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)993-1029
Number of pages37
JournalJournal of Economic History
Volume75
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 16 2015

Fingerprint

Great Depression
Italy
Trade Policy
Trade policy
Economic Growth
Import
Economic growth
Revival
Economic History
Revenue
1880s
1890s
Causal Relation
Unification
Economic history
Welfare loss

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • History
  • Economics and Econometrics
  • Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous)

Cite this

What Do We Really Know about Protection before the Great Depression : Evidence from Italy. / Federico, Giovanni; Vasta, Michelangelo.

In: Journal of Economic History, Vol. 75, No. 4, 16.12.2015, p. 993-1029.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Federico, Giovanni ; Vasta, Michelangelo. / What Do We Really Know about Protection before the Great Depression : Evidence from Italy. In: Journal of Economic History. 2015 ; Vol. 75, No. 4. pp. 993-1029.
@article{9b8d71cbda4345dea092cf5e5857aff7,
title = "What Do We Really Know about Protection before the Great Depression: Evidence from Italy",
abstract = "The impact of protection on economic growth has enjoyed a revival in recent times, with the publication of a number of comparative quantitative papers. They all share a common weakness: they measure protection as the ratio of custom revenues to import value, which biases results if demand for imports is not perfectly inelastic. In this article, we show that the measure of protection matters. We estimate the James Anderson and Peter Neary (2005) Trade Restrictiveness Index for Italy from unification to the Great Depression. We suggest a different interpretation of some key moments of Italian trade policy and we show that the aggregate welfare losses were small in the long run and mostly related to protection on sugar in the 1880s and 1890s. We document that using different measures of protection affects results of the causal relation between trade policy on economic growth in Italy and in the United States. Accordingly, we argue{\^A} that a systematic re-estimating of protection in the economic history of trade policy is needed.",
author = "Giovanni Federico and Michelangelo Vasta",
year = "2015",
month = "12",
day = "16",
doi = "10.1017/S0022050715001552",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "75",
pages = "993--1029",
journal = "Journal of Economic History",
issn = "0022-0507",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - What Do We Really Know about Protection before the Great Depression

T2 - Evidence from Italy

AU - Federico, Giovanni

AU - Vasta, Michelangelo

PY - 2015/12/16

Y1 - 2015/12/16

N2 - The impact of protection on economic growth has enjoyed a revival in recent times, with the publication of a number of comparative quantitative papers. They all share a common weakness: they measure protection as the ratio of custom revenues to import value, which biases results if demand for imports is not perfectly inelastic. In this article, we show that the measure of protection matters. We estimate the James Anderson and Peter Neary (2005) Trade Restrictiveness Index for Italy from unification to the Great Depression. We suggest a different interpretation of some key moments of Italian trade policy and we show that the aggregate welfare losses were small in the long run and mostly related to protection on sugar in the 1880s and 1890s. We document that using different measures of protection affects results of the causal relation between trade policy on economic growth in Italy and in the United States. Accordingly, we argue that a systematic re-estimating of protection in the economic history of trade policy is needed.

AB - The impact of protection on economic growth has enjoyed a revival in recent times, with the publication of a number of comparative quantitative papers. They all share a common weakness: they measure protection as the ratio of custom revenues to import value, which biases results if demand for imports is not perfectly inelastic. In this article, we show that the measure of protection matters. We estimate the James Anderson and Peter Neary (2005) Trade Restrictiveness Index for Italy from unification to the Great Depression. We suggest a different interpretation of some key moments of Italian trade policy and we show that the aggregate welfare losses were small in the long run and mostly related to protection on sugar in the 1880s and 1890s. We document that using different measures of protection affects results of the causal relation between trade policy on economic growth in Italy and in the United States. Accordingly, we argue that a systematic re-estimating of protection in the economic history of trade policy is needed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84950311243&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84950311243&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/S0022050715001552

DO - 10.1017/S0022050715001552

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:84950311243

VL - 75

SP - 993

EP - 1029

JO - Journal of Economic History

JF - Journal of Economic History

SN - 0022-0507

IS - 4

ER -