nordic conference on development economics bergen, june 2013 trinity college dublin carol newman,...
TRANSCRIPT
Nordic Conference on Development EconomicsBergen, June 2013
Trinity College Dublin
Carol Newman, Trinity College Dublin
John Rand, University of Copenhagen
Finn Tarp, UNU-WIDER and University of Copenhagen
Trade liberalization, supply chains and productivity
Overview of paper Explore the relationship between trade liberalization and firm
productivity using the case of Vietnam 2002-2010 Focus on the impact of imported intermediates on firm productivity
Key contributions: Focus on effects through the supply chain distinguishing between
competition and productivity channels on import and non-import firms
Introduce a new measure of supply chain linkages that measures the extent of exposure of a sector to imports upstream using Supply Use Tables
Exploit differences in the effects in competitive and concentrated sectors and in the impact of imports into competitive and concentrated upstream sectors.
We explicitly investigate the technology transfer channel as a source of productivity growth for firms that import foreign inputs
Preview of results We find no evidence of pure productivity improvements associated
with importing intermediates post-WTO accession
We find some suggestive evidence of positive productivity impacts in the pre-WTO period that are likely attributed to higher quality imported inputs, more imported varieties or technology transfers.
We find evidence of reallocation effects among non-import firms with the least efficient exiting or beginning to import intermediates
Once trade is liberalized this source of productivity growth for importing firms disappears along with reallocation effects through this channel
Related Literature Large empirical literature linking trade to productivity improvements
at the industry and firm level: Tybout et al. (1991), Pavcnik (2002), Eslava et al. (2004), Fernandes (2007)
Specific evidence for imported inputs as a channel for productivity growth provided by: Kasahara and Rodrigue (2008) for Chile, Halpern et al. (2005) for Hungary,
Goldberg et al. (2008) for India Amiti and Konings (2007) for Indonesia and that gains are achieved
through learning, variety and quality effects.
Some contradicting evidence provided by: Van Biesebroeck (2003) no evidence that productivity improvements in
Columbia are due the use of foreign inputs Muendler (2004) limited effects of foreign inputs on productivity in Brazil.
Description of mechanisms Assume that both upstream and downstream sectors are
competitive.
An expansion of imports in upstream sectors will increase competitive pressures that will result in overall efficiency gains (Holmes and Schmitz, 2001; Amiti and Konings, 2007). This will lead to a fall in the price of input for firms further along
the supply chain.
An expansion of imported intermediates will lead to technology diffusion through greater variety, better quality inputs and new technologies embodied in those inputs (Grossman and Helpman, 1991). These productivity effects will affect firms that import
intermediates. This in turn might increase competitive pressure on downstream
non-import firms
Identification of mechanisms Identification of effects is complicated by the fact that data
only available on the value of inputs and outputs Physical productivity cannot be estimated and so we must
use a revenue based measures (see Foster et al, 2008). Implication is that observed productivity changes will
embody both within-firm physical productivity gains and changes in prices and/or mark-ups
We consider how the impact of an expansion of imports in upstream differs for competitive versus concentrated sectors
Focusing competitive sectors allows us to detect within-firm effects
Identification of mechanisms
Impact of decline in costs in upstream sectors:
In concentrated downstream sectors lower costs will lead to larger mark-ups as there will be no competitive pressures to erode costs. This will look like productivity improvements on a revenue based measure of productivity.
In competitive downstream sectors price competition will erode away any cost advantages. Should observe no change in measured productivity downstream through this mechanism.
Identification of mechanisms Detecting productivity improvements through the availability of
more variety, better quality inputs, or embodied technologies:
Can be isolated by testing whether importing firms in competitive sectors experience productivity improvements.
Upstream sectors will vary in how competitive they are. Impact of imports on prices upstream will be more pronounced
in competitive upstream sectors
An expansion of imports into concentrated upstream sectors is less likely to impact on the price of imports downstream
Any observed productivity effects on firms in downstream sectors are likely to be associated with real productivity as opposed to competition effects.
Identification of mechanisms
Impact of productivity improvements experienced by competing import firms on non-import firms
Increased competitive pressures imply only the most efficient firms will survive. Least efficient will exit. Overall productivity will improve due to reallocation of resources toward more efficient firms (Melitz, 2003)
Empirical Approach Step 1: Productivity measurement Index Number approach - productivity measured relative to a
reference point which we take as the mean level of productivity in a given sector in a given year
To analyse changes over time we chain link productivity differential to changes in the reference level of productivity from year to year
t k
m
__________
mjt
________
mjt
_______
mjt
____
mjt
k
m
_________
mjtmijt
_____
mjtmijt
t _________
jt
________
jt
_______
jtijtijt
XlnXlnss
XlnXlnss
YlnYlnYlnYln
2 111
1
21
2
1
2
1
output of firm in sector in year
amount of input used by the firm
expenditure of firm on input as a share of firm's total expenditure
ijt
mijt
mijt
Y i j t
X m
s m
Empirical Approach Step two: fixed effects regression Regress productivity on a series of indicator variables that capture
mechanisms Also include an indicator of trade liberalization (accession to WTO)
given that competition effects associated with an expansion in imports likely to be different under different trade regimes
Baseline:
ijttjijtijt
ijtijt
ijtijt
ijtijtijtTFP
eτφα
WTO*firmIm_δWTOδfirmIm_δ
upIm_*WTO*firmIm_βWTO*upIm_β
upIm_*firmIm_αupIm_α
ζZξX
321
21
21
Empirical Approach Interact all import variables with sector-level measure of
concentration:
Overall impact of change in imports into upstream sectors given by:
Main predictions: Non-import firms
No impact in competitive sectors:
Reallocation effects in competitive sectors: Import firms:
No impact in competitive sectors:
Productivity gains in competitive sectors:
ni ijtjt sHHI 1
2
4321
4321
HHI*WTO*firmIm_βHHI*WTOβWTO*firmIm_βWTOβ
HHI*firmIm_αHHIαfirmIm_ααupIm_
ijtijt
ijtijtijt
ijtTFP
0 , 0 111 βαα
0 , 0 111 βαα
0 , 0 222 βαα
0 , 0 222 βαα
Vietnamese Context The opening up of the Vietnamese economy began in 1986
with the adoption of a range of policy measures under doi moi (renovation) in particular relating to trade liberalisation and the promotion of foreign direct investment (FDI)
Trade liberalization took the form of the removal of export taxes and non-tariff barriers and the negotiation of various trade agreements with ASEAN, the US and the EU which ultimately lead to WTO accession in 2007
Significant growth in exports and imports over 2000s: Steady growth in both is evident throughout the 2000s but in
particular post WTO accession in 2007
Trade in Vietnam
Source: General Statistics Office Vietnam, National Accounts
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 20100.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
Exports/GDP Imports/GDP
Data Vietnamese Enterprise Survey collected annually by the
GSO for 2002 to 2010 Data gathered on population of all registered enterprises in
Vietnam with 30 employees or more and representative sample of smaller firms
47,556 firms over 10 year period totaling 141,262 observations
Export and import data at 4-digit level taken from COMTRADE
Supply Use Tables for Vietnam in 2007 to measure input-output linkages along the supply chain
Manufacturing firm characteristicsNumber of
firmsSize
EmployeesEntrants
(%)Exits(%)
Foreign(%)
State(%)
Import(%)
2002 13,663 156 24.83 17.35 11.89 10.43 12.76
2003 15,401 159 26.68 15.39 12.35 8.84 13.44
2004 18,238 151 28.55 11.91 12.13 6.97 13.33
2005 21,618 141 25.68 15.88 11.81 5.58 13.38
2006 23,803 136 23.60 13.93 12.29 4.67 13.38
2007 28,821 133 28.92 14.84 11.85 3.95 12.23
2008 36,363 113 32.50 21.50 10.64 3.13 10.12
2009 39,101 108 26.99 18.31 10.82 2.96 10.67
2010 38,217 120 16.42 - 10.86 2.76 14.57
Measuring supply chain linkages Vietnam Supply-Use Tables (SUT) for 2007 The SUT maps the use of 138 commodities in 112
production activities We link these production activities to the 4-digit ISIC codes
used in the Enterprise Survey to produce 97 comparable sector codes
The SUT data are used to construct a sets of weights that captures upstream linkages between sectors, whereby for each sector i, their link with upstream sector j is the proportional contribution of output from sector j to its total input base
Weights used to compute a weighted average of imports from upstream sectors
Exposure to imports through supply chainSector 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 201015 28.10 9.98 12.62 12.32 10.11 11.96 10.98 7.44 5.7617 11.24 4.58 7.13 7.24 6.28 7.44 7.07 4.02 3.2418 5.55 2.33 3.47 3.60 2.95 2.85 2.71 1.47 0.8819 5.92 4.33 4.15 3.37 3.56 3.32 2.84 2.37 1.9720 36.34 11.10 12.13 13.63 12.54 12.95 11.97 8.92 7.0421 24.60 6.12 5.64 9.19 5.24 6.22 7.45 4.32 3.7322 1.69 0.50 0.55 0.62 0.33 0.52 0.40 0.38 0.2924 40.53 14.27 15.42 16.28 15.24 14.70 13.29 8.82 7.7225 30.12 11.22 12.09 11.77 11.52 11.45 10.38 6.81 6.3726 38.74 18.82 20.70 20.61 20.23 18.86 16.81 10.89 9.3828 12.12 6.23 9.67 9.88 9.29 9.46 7.86 5.44 3.8429 18.61 7.53 9.59 9.98 9.97 9.51 8.42 5.01 4.3831 7.04 2.65 3.87 3.91 3.23 3.56 3.10 1.99 1.5032 17.03 6.82 8.92 8.93 8.11 8.55 8.17 5.17 3.6033 35.60 15.99 19.07 19.77 18.79 18.11 16.68 10.44 7.7734 6.07 15.24 6.99 8.21 8.39 11.43 10.11 8.68 5.2935 19.66 8.62 10.98 11.24 11.43 11.33 10.01 6.21 5.5736 0.58 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.01
Empirical Approach Control Variables: Firm specific factors:
1. Import firm
2. Export firm
3. Exit firm (in subsequent period)
4. Switch firm (in subsequent period)
5. Capital-labor ratio
6. Size of firm
7. Foreign-owned firm
8. State-owned firm Sector specific factors:
1. Average capital-labor ratio
2. Average size of firms in sector
3. Proportion of revenue generated by foreign owned firms
4. Proportion of revenue generated by state owned firms
5. Concentration Ratio
Also estimate models using balanced panel as additional control for reallocation effects
Results – competition and productivity effects
(1) (2) (3)Balanced
Competitive pre WTO:
Prop imports upstream 0.002** 0.004*** 0.005***
Import Firm*Imports upstream 0.000 -0.002 -0.003*
Concentrated pre WTO:
HHI*Prop imports upstream -0.018** -0.035** -0.043**
HHI*Import Firm*Imports upstream 0.003 0.025** 0.035**
Competitive post WTO:
WTO* Imports upstream -0.003*** -0.004*** -0.005***
WTO* Import Firm * Imports upstream 0.000 0.0005 0.000
Concentrated post WTO:
HHI*WTO* Imports upstream 0.082*** 0.104*** 0.153***
HHI*WTO* Import Firm * Imports upstream -0.043*** -0.055*** -0.050**
Upstream concentration controls No Yes Yes
R-squared 0.537 0.526 0.874
Firms 47,602 47,602 4,832
n 141,876 141,876 35,749
1α2α3α4α1β2β3β4β
Detecting productivity gains to import firms
(1) (2) (3)Balanced
Competitive pre WTO:
Prop imports upstream 0.002** 0.004*** 0.005***
Import Firm*Imports upstream 0.000 -0.002 -0.003*
Concentrated pre WTO:
HHI*Prop imports upstream -0.018** -0.035** -0.043**
HHI*Import Firm*Imports upstream 0.003 0.025** 0.035**
Competitive post WTO:
WTO* Imports upstream -0.003*** -0.004*** -0.005***
WTO* Import Firm * Imports upstream 0.000 0.0005 0.000
Concentrated post WTO:
HHI*WTO* Imports upstream 0.082*** 0.104*** 0.153***
HHI*WTO* Import Firm * Imports upstream -0.043*** -0.055*** -0.050**
Upstream concentration controls No Yes Yes
R-squared 0.537 0.526 0.874
Firms 47,602 47,602 4,832
n 141,876 141,876 35,749
1α2α3α4α1β2β3β4β
0 , 0 222 βαα
Detecting productivity gains to import firms
1α2α3α4α1β2β3β4β
(2) (3)
Upstream Concentration Differential:Competitive Downstream:
Prop imports upstream -0.026** -0.033*Import Firm -0.012 -0.071Import Firm*Imports upstream 0.023** 0.035**WTO* Imports upstream 0.011 0.055**WTO* Import Firm -0.100 -0.129WTO* Import Firm * Imports upstream -0.002 -0.011Concentrated Downstream:
HHI*Prop imports upstream 0.231 0.315HHI*Import Firm 0.803 1.081HHI*Import Firm*Imports upstream -0.295** -0.433**HHI*WTO* Imports upstream -0.156 -1.520***HHI*WTO* Import Firm -0.741 -0.809HHI*WTO* Import Firm * Imports upstream 0.103 -0.220
R-squared 0.526 0.874Firms 47,602 4,832n 141,876 35,749
Detecting productivity gains to import firms
1α2α3α4α1β2β3β4β
(2) (3)
Upstream Concentration Differential:Competitive Downstream:
Prop imports upstream -0.026** -0.033*Import Firm -0.012 -0.071Import Firm*Imports upstream 0.023** 0.035**WTO* Imports upstream 0.011 0.055**WTO* Import Firm -0.100 -0.129WTO* Import Firm * Imports upstream -0.002 -0.011Concentrated Downstream:
HHI*Prop imports upstream 0.231 0.315HHI*Import Firm 0.803 1.081HHI*Import Firm*Imports upstream -0.295** -0.433**HHI*WTO* Imports upstream -0.156 -1.520***HHI*WTO* Import Firm -0.741 -0.809HHI*WTO* Import Firm * Imports upstream 0.103 -0.220
R-squared 0.526 0.874Firms 47,602 4,832n 141,876 35,749
Detecting competition and reallocation effects among non-import firms
(1) (2) (3)Balanced
Competitive pre WTO:
Prop imports upstream 0.002** 0.004*** 0.005***
Import Firm*Imports upstream 0.000 -0.002 -0.003*
Concentrated pre WTO:
HHI*Prop imports upstream -0.018** -0.035** -0.043**
HHI*Import Firm*Imports upstream 0.003 0.025** 0.035**
Competitive post WTO:
WTO* Imports upstream -0.003*** -0.004*** -0.005***
WTO* Import Firm * Imports upstream 0.000 0.0005 0.000
Concentrated post WTO:
HHI*WTO* Imports upstream 0.082*** 0.104*** 0.153***
HHI*WTO* Import Firm * Imports upstream -0.043*** -0.055*** -0.050**
Upstream concentration controls No Yes Yes
R-squared 0.537 0.526 0.874
Firms 47,602 47,602 4,832
n 141,876 141,876 35,749
1α2α3α4α1β2β3β4β
Detecting competition and reallocation effects among non-import firms
(1) (2) (3)Balanced
Competitive pre WTO:
Prop imports upstream 0.002** 0.004*** 0.005***
Import Firm*Imports upstream 0.000 -0.002 -0.003*
Concentrated pre WTO:
HHI*Prop imports upstream -0.018** -0.035** -0.043**
HHI*Import Firm*Imports upstream 0.003 0.025** 0.035**
Competitive post WTO:
WTO* Imports upstream -0.003*** -0.004*** -0.005***
WTO* Import Firm * Imports upstream 0.000 0.0005 0.000
Concentrated post WTO:
HHI*WTO* Imports upstream 0.082*** 0.104*** 0.153***
HHI*WTO* Import Firm * Imports upstream -0.043*** -0.055*** -0.050**
Upstream concentration controls No Yes Yes
R-squared 0.537 0.526 0.874
Firms 47,602 47,602 4,832
n 141,876 141,876 35,749
1α2α3α4α1β2β3β4β
00 111 βα,α
Results – reallocation effects
1α2α3α4α1β2β3β4β
(1)Exit
(2)Switch Sector
(3)Start Importing
Competitive pre WTO:
Prop imports upstream 0.001*** 0.002 0.001*Import Firm*Imports upstream 0.000 -0.001Concentrated pre WTO:
HHI*Prop imports upstream -0.005 0.003 -0.004*HHI*Import Firm*Imports upstream 0.003 0.002Competitive post WTO:
WTO* Imports upstream -0.001* 0.001 0.0005WTO* Import Firm * Imports upstream 0.001 -0.001Concentrated post WTO:
HHI*WTO* Imports upstream 0.005 0.004 0.002HHI*WTO* Import Firm * Imports upstream 0.007 0.010
R-squared 0.075 0.074 0.110Firms 45,990 45,990 45,820n 137,781 137,781 127,686
1α2α3α4α1β2β3β4β
Results – reallocation effects
1α2α3α4α1β2β3β4β
(1)Exit
(2)Switch Sector
(3)Start Importing
Competitive pre WTO:
Prop imports upstream 0.001*** 0.002 0.001*Import Firm*Imports upstream 0.000 -0.001Concentrated pre WTO:
HHI*Prop imports upstream -0.005 0.003 -0.004*HHI*Import Firm*Imports upstream 0.003 0.002Competitive post WTO:
WTO* Imports upstream -0.001* 0.001 0.0005WTO* Import Firm * Imports upstream 0.001 -0.001Concentrated post WTO:
HHI*WTO* Imports upstream 0.005 0.004 0.002HHI*WTO* Import Firm * Imports upstream 0.007 0.010
R-squared 0.075 0.074 0.110Firms 45,990 45,990 45,820n 137,781 137,781 127,686
1α2α3α4α1β2β3β4β
Technology Channel Further investigation of productivity spillovers for import
firms post-WTO accession
Indicator for whether firm has any international suppliers Indicator for whether relationship with international supplier
resulted in technology transfers
Perform same analysis using 2 years of data and including these indicator variables
Results – technology spillovers
1α2α3α4α1β2β3β4β1α2α3α4α1β2β3β4β
(2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
Competitive:
Prop imports upstream 0.040* 0.047** -0.014 -0.013 -0.023Int supplier 0.021 0.033Int supplier * Imports upstream -0.005 -0.010**Int supplier tech transfers -0.022* -0.009 0.033Int supplier tech transfers * Imports upstream -0.003 -0.010*Concentrated
HHI*Prop imports upstream -0.097 0.056HHI* Int supplier -0.171HHI* Int supplier*Imports upstream 0.056HHI* Int supplier tech transfers -0.587*HHI*Int supplier tech transfers*Imports upstream 0.095*
R-squared 0.768 0.770 0.803 0.803 0.807Firms 7,830 7,830 2,848 2,848 2,848N 12,530 12,530 4,104 4,104 4,104
Results – technology spillovers
1α2α3α4α1β2β3β4β1α2α3α4α1β2β3β4β
(2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
Competitive:
Prop imports upstream 0.040* 0.047** -0.014 -0.013 -0.023Int supplier 0.021 0.033Int supplier * Imports upstream -0.005 -0.010**Int supplier tech transfers -0.022* -0.009 0.033Int supplier tech transfers * Imports upstream -0.003 -0.010*Concentrated
HHI*Prop imports upstream -0.097 0.056HHI* Int supplier -0.171HHI* Int supplier*Imports upstream 0.056HHI* Int supplier tech transfers -0.587*HHI*Int supplier tech transfers*Imports upstream 0.095*
R-squared 0.768 0.770 0.803 0.803 0.807Firms 7,830 7,830 2,848 2,848 2,848N 12,530 12,530 4,104 4,104 4,104
Summary of key findings We find little evidence of pure productivity improvements
associated with importing intermediates in the post-WTO period. We find some suggestive evidence of positive productivity impacts
in the pre-WTO period that are likely attributed to higher quality imported inputs, more imported varieties or technology transfers.
Consistent with this finding is evidence of reallocation effects in the pre-WTO period with the least efficient non-import firms exiting or beginning to import intermediates.
Once trade is fully liberalized this source of productivity growth for importing firms disappears along with reallocation effects through this channel.
This is suggestive of lower quality imports or the dumping of inferior intermediates in the post-WTO period leading to fewer opportunities for technology transfers.
Our supplementary analysis using the technology module supports this finding.
Thank you
Questions and comments most welcome
APPENDIX
Sectoral composition in VietnamShare of Employment
Manufacturing HT Manufacturing
Services Agriculture
2002 51.06 14.74 39.27 9.67
2003 53.20 15.31 38.42 8.37
2004 53.83 15.63 38.55 7.62
2005 53.10 15.49 39.62 7.28
2006 54.18 15.93 39.05 6.76
2007 54.01 16.51 39.91 6.08
2008 50.05 15.72 42.49 7.17
2009 48.83 16.20 44.44 6.72
2010 45.67 15.19 48.35 5.97
Sectoral composition in VietnamShare of Output
Manufacturing HT Manufacturing
Services Agriculture
2002 33.89 15.07 59.51 6.60
2003 34.23 16.01 60.00 5.76
2004 37.74 17.60 55.29 6.96
2005 37.10 17.50 55.55 7.35
2006 37.75 17.82 55.72 6.52
2007 38.73 19.03 56.82 4.45
2008 36.08 18.05 60.68 3.24
2009 40.14 20.33 56.75 3.10
2010 37.29 19.47 59.90 2.81
Sectoral exposure to trade: DirectShare of Exports Share of Imports
Man Man HT Ag Man Man HT Ag
2002
73.45 18.29 26.55 93.85 70.29 6.15
2003
49.87 17.43 50.12 89.70 71.34 10.29
2004
34.99 13.83 65.01 83.90 69.71 16.08
2005
46.97 17.27 53.03 84.19 63.05 15.78
2006
35.58 12.53 64.42 86.11 70.96 13.78
2007
31.38 12.87 68.62 82.92 70.38 16.90
2008
36.18 13.15 63.81 77.55 63.18 22.27
2009
32.36 13.98 67.62 71.39 58.33 28.31
2010
33.23 14.85 66.69 70.12 58.26 29.55
Trade in Vietnam – Sectoral Composition
0
50000000
100000000
150000000
200000000
250000000
300000000
350000000
400000000
450000000
500000000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Exports Imports Man Exports Man Imports
Source: Author’s calculations based on COMTRADE database.Notes: Deflated to 2000 values using 4-digit sector level GDP deflator
Sectoral exposure to trade: Indirect
0
100000000
200000000
300000000
400000000
500000000
600000000
700000000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Exports from upstream Imports into upstream
Exports from downstream Imports into downstream
0
20000000
40000000
60000000
80000000
100000000
120000000
140000000
160000000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Exports from upstream Imports into upstream
Exports from downstream Imports into downstream
0
20000000
40000000
60000000
80000000
100000000
120000000
140000000
160000000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Exports from upstream Imports into upstream
Exports from downstream Imports into downstream
Manufacturing Services
Agriculture
Sectoral composition in VietnamShare of Employment
Manufacturing HT Manufacturing
Services Agriculture
2001 49.69 14.62 39.41 10.89
2002 51.06 14.74 39.27 9.67
2003 53.20 15.31 38.42 8.37
2004 53.83 15.63 38.55 7.62
2005 53.10 15.49 39.62 7.28
2006 54.18 15.93 39.05 6.76
2007 54.01 16.51 39.91 6.08
2008 50.05 15.72 42.49 7.17
2009 48.83 16.20 44.44 6.72
2010 45.67 15.19 48.35 5.97
Sectoral composition in VietnamShare of Capital
Manufacturing HT Manufacturing
Services Agriculture
2001 33.06 16.81 56.54 10.39
2002 37.87 18.89 51.46 10.66
2003 37.83 19.38 52.92 9.24
2004 36.54 18.59 54.56 8.90
2005 35.64 18.63 56.57 7.79
2006 33.72 18.29 59.63 6.65
2007 30.00 16.15 65.47 4.52
2008 30.48 16.39 66.07 3.45
2009 29.26 17.60 67.10 3.64
2010 20.97 12.31 75.41 3.62
Sectoral composition in VietnamShare of Output
Manufacturing HT Manufacturing
Services Agriculture
2001 34.77 16.35 57.04 8.18
2002 33.89 15.07 59.51 6.60
2003 34.23 16.01 60.00 5.76
2004 37.74 17.60 55.29 6.96
2005 37.10 17.50 55.55 7.35
2006 37.75 17.82 55.72 6.52
2007 38.73 19.03 56.82 4.45
2008 36.08 18.05 60.68 3.24
2009 40.14 20.33 56.75 3.10
2010 37.29 19.47 59.90 2.81
Sectoral exposure to trade: DirectShare of Exports Share of Imports
Man Man HT Ag Man Man HT Ag
2001
42.21 15.21 57.79 84.50 65.86 15.49
2002
73.45 18.29 26.55 93.85 70.29 6.15
2003
49.87 17.43 50.12 89.70 71.34 10.29
2004
34.99 13.83 65.01 83.90 69.71 16.08
2005
46.97 17.27 53.03 84.19 63.05 15.78
2006
35.58 12.53 64.42 86.11 70.96 13.78
2007
31.38 12.87 68.62 82.92 70.38 16.90
2008
36.18 13.15 63.81 77.55 63.18 22.27
2009
32.36 13.98 67.62 71.39 58.33 28.31
2010
33.23 14.85 66.69 70.12 58.26 29.55