Trade Liberalization, Exports, and Technology Upgrading: Evidence on the Impact of MERCOSUR on Argentinian Firms

By P. Bustos. 2011

1,706 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/240984d9bc1f48b9c73b500c0f1ab27d665f9ebf

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

A Trapped-Factors Model of Innovation † (2013, background): “Individual firms that faced more import competition exhibited a bigger increase in inno vation.”
Productivity growth in Italy: a tale of a slow-motion change (2018, positive): “Bustos (2011) shows that Argentinean firms respond to the Mercosur Free Trade Agreement by increasing both their export market participation and their technology spending. Autor et al. (2016) find instead a negative impact of Chinese import penetration on US manufacturing firms’ patents. 36 Martin a”
Internationalization and Innovation of Firms: Evidence and Policy (2013, background): “Bustos (2011) finds supporting evidence for this effect in the case of Argentina and Mercosur.”
Does importing more inputs raise exports? Firm-level evidence from France (2013, positive): “Few theoretical exceptions introduce endogenous productivity gains determined by R&D investments: Costantini and Melitz (2007), Atkeson and Burstein (2010), Aw, Roberts and Xu (2009) and Bustos (2010). The most recent literature extends the source of heterogeneity to characteristics other than just ”
Trade Induced Technical Change? The Impact of Chinese Imports on innovation, IT and Productivity (2011, background): “7 These mechanisms do not seem 2 For low-wage countries, Bustos (2011) finds positive effects on innovation from lower export barriers for Argentinean firms and Teshima (2008) finds positive effects on process R&D from lower output tariffs for Mexican firms.”
Trading Away Wide Brands for Cheap Brands (2011, background): “16The product innovation measure of Bustos includes both new products and “technological improvement of existing products.” Similarly, Teshima (2008) includes product quality upgrades in his product R&D measure of Mexican firms.”
Cross-Border M&As and Innovative Activity of Acquiring and Target Firms (2016, background): “See e.g. Cohen and Levine (1989) for an overview of innovation and market structure and, among others, Bustos (2011) and Aw et al. (2007, 2008) for analyses of exporting and innovation.”
The Return to Protectionism* (2019, neutral): “…across sectors to assess effects on sectors (e.g., Attanasio, Goldberg, and Pavcnik 2004), regions (e.g., Topalova 2010; Kovak 2013; Dix-Carneiro and Kovak 2017), firms (e.g., Amiti and Konings 2007; Goldberg et al. 2010; Bustos 2011), or workers (e.g., Autor et al. 2014; McCaig and Pavcnik 2018).”
Does Environmental Regulation Indirectly Induce Upstream Innovation? New Evidence from India (2017, neutral): “Next, we relax the industry*year fixed effects and instead control for the trade liberalization process in India by directly introducing input tariffs by each 2-digit sector within chemical industry in Column (3) to control for the fact that drop in tariffs significantly drives innovation (Bustos, 2”
Firms in international trade (2016, background): “Similar to Verhoogen (2008) and Bustos (2011), reduced costs of trade increase investment in marketing, which increases trade through a “new consumers” margin of trade. However, different from the canonical model, the elasticity with respect to trade costs is higher for small firms, as on the margin”
Trade, Quality Upgrading, and Input Linkages: Theory and Evidence from Colombia (2018, background): “Then, if the trade liberalization increases the skill premium, the marginal benefit of upgrading in equation (16) decreases unless revenue r(q, p(q, ω)) increases.”