#FREEDOM FRIES SERIES#

We present evidence on the effect of social connections between workers and managers on productivity in the workplace.

Finally, we find suggestive evidence for sanctions avoidance by exporting indirectly via neighboring countries. Firms that depend more on trade finance instruments are more strongly affected, while prior experience in the sanctioned country considerably softens the blow of sanctions, and firms can be partly immune to the sanctions effect if they are specialized in serving “crisis countries”. Additionally, the impact of sanctions is very heterogeneous along firm dimensions and by case particularities. sanctions on Cuba and the removal of sanctions against Myanmar had no or only small trade-inducing effects, respectively. We find that the introduction of new sanctions in Iran and Russia significantly lowered firm-level probabilities of serving these sanctioned markets, while the (temporary) lifting of the U.S. We draw on recent econometric advances in the estimation of dynamic fixed effects binary choice models. How do exporting firms react to sanctions? Specifically, which firms are willing - or capable - to serve the market of a sanctioned country? We investigate this question for four sanctions episodes using monthly data on the universe of French exporting firms. A possible explanation for these patterns is an increase in trade costs due to stricter security measures. The reduction in trade mainly takes place along the intensive margin, with particularly strong effects for partner countries with low border barriers to France, for firms with less frequent trade activities and for homogeneous products. According to our estimates, France's trade in goods, which accounts for about 70 percent of the country's trade in goods and services, is reduced by more than 6 billion euros in the first six months after an attack. Using firm-level data at monthly frequency, we document an immediate and lasting decline in cross-border trade after a mass terrorist attack.

#FREEDOM FRIES SERIES#

This paper analyzes the impact of terrorism on international trade by examining a series of three large-scale terrorist incidents in France over the period from January 2015 to July 2016. Terrorist events typically vary along many dimensions, making it difficult to identify their economic effects. This paper was accepted by Matthew Shum, marketing. In contrast, the consistent improvement of Canada’s country image between 20 has amounted to more than 8% of its total welfare gains from trade.

The negative impact of Donald Trump’s “America First” campaign rhetoric on the U.S.’s country image might have cost the United States 4%–5% of its total exports and welfare gains from trade. We find that such changes in bilateral country image perceptions have quantitatively important trade and welfare effects. Bush effect, the Donald Trump effect, the Senkaku Islands Dispute effect, the Brexit effect, and the Good-Boy Canadian effect. We consider five important shifts in country image: the George W. We identify the effects on consumer preference parameters due to shifts in these country image perceptions and quantify their general equilibrium effects on bilateral exports and welfare (each time for an evaluated exporting country, holding the exporting country’s own preference parameters constant). We use a unique data set from the BBC World Service Poll, which surveys (annually during 2005–2017 with some gaps) the populations of a wide array of countries on their views of whether an evaluated country is having a mainly positive or negative influence in the world. This paper estimates the effects of time-varying consumer preference bias on trade flows and welfare.

Freedom fries