伙伴国家的统计数据对估计缺失的贸易数据有用吗?

A. Yeats
{"title":"伙伴国家的统计数据对估计缺失的贸易数据有用吗?","authors":"A. Yeats","doi":"10.1596/1813-9450-1501","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Because many developing countries fail to report trade statistics to the United Nations, there has been an interest in using partner-country data to fill these information gaps. The author used partner-country statistics for 30 developing countries to \"estimate\" actual (concealed) trade data and analyzed the magnitude of the resulting errors. The results indicate that partner-country data are unreliable even for estimating trade in broad aggregate product groups such as foodstuffs, fuels, or manufactures. Moreover, tests show that the reliability of partner-country statistics degenerates sharply as one moves to more finely distinguished trade categories (lower-level SITCs). Equally disturbing, about one-quarter of the partner-country comparisons take the wrong sign. That is, one country's reported free-on-board (f.o.b.) exports exceed the reported cost-insurance-freight (c.i.f.) value of partners' imports. Aside from product composition, tests show that partner-country data are equally inaccurate for estimating the direction of trade. Why are partner-country data so unreliable for approximating \"missing\" data? Evidence shows: 1) problems in reporting or processing COMTRADE data; 2) valuation differences (f.o.b. versus c.i.f.) for imports and exports; 3) problems relating to entrepot trade, or exports originating in export processing zones; 4) problems associated with exchange-rate changes; 5) intentional or unintentional misclassification of products; 6) efforts to \"conceal\" trade data for proprietary reasons; and 7) financial incentives to purposely falsify trade data. The author concludes that efforts to improve the general quality, or availability, of trade statistics using partner-country data holds little or no promise, although this information may be useful in specific cases where the trade statistics of a certain country are known to incorporate major errors. Significant progress in ugrading the accuracy, and coverage, of trade statistics can be achieved only by improving each country's procedures for data collection.","PeriodicalId":166412,"journal":{"name":"World Bank: International Economics (Topic)","volume":"99 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1995-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"25","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are Partner-Country Statistics Useful for Estimating Missing Trade Data?\",\"authors\":\"A. Yeats\",\"doi\":\"10.1596/1813-9450-1501\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Because many developing countries fail to report trade statistics to the United Nations, there has been an interest in using partner-country data to fill these information gaps. The author used partner-country statistics for 30 developing countries to \\\"estimate\\\" actual (concealed) trade data and analyzed the magnitude of the resulting errors. The results indicate that partner-country data are unreliable even for estimating trade in broad aggregate product groups such as foodstuffs, fuels, or manufactures. Moreover, tests show that the reliability of partner-country statistics degenerates sharply as one moves to more finely distinguished trade categories (lower-level SITCs). Equally disturbing, about one-quarter of the partner-country comparisons take the wrong sign. That is, one country's reported free-on-board (f.o.b.) exports exceed the reported cost-insurance-freight (c.i.f.) value of partners' imports. Aside from product composition, tests show that partner-country data are equally inaccurate for estimating the direction of trade. Why are partner-country data so unreliable for approximating \\\"missing\\\" data? Evidence shows: 1) problems in reporting or processing COMTRADE data; 2) valuation differences (f.o.b. versus c.i.f.) for imports and exports; 3) problems relating to entrepot trade, or exports originating in export processing zones; 4) problems associated with exchange-rate changes; 5) intentional or unintentional misclassification of products; 6) efforts to \\\"conceal\\\" trade data for proprietary reasons; and 7) financial incentives to purposely falsify trade data. The author concludes that efforts to improve the general quality, or availability, of trade statistics using partner-country data holds little or no promise, although this information may be useful in specific cases where the trade statistics of a certain country are known to incorporate major errors. Significant progress in ugrading the accuracy, and coverage, of trade statistics can be achieved only by improving each country's procedures for data collection.\",\"PeriodicalId\":166412,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World Bank: International Economics (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"99 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1995-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"25\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World Bank: International Economics (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-1501\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Bank: International Economics (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-1501","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 25

摘要

由于许多发展中国家没有向联合国报告贸易统计数据,因此人们有兴趣利用伙伴国家的数据来填补这些信息空白。作者利用30个发展中国家的伙伴国统计数据来“估计”实际(隐藏的)贸易数据,并分析由此产生的误差的程度。结果表明,即使在估计食品、燃料或制成品等广泛的综合产品类别的贸易时,伙伴国的数据也是不可靠的。此外,测试表明,随着人们转向更精细区分的贸易类别(较低水平的贸易分类),伙伴国家统计数据的可靠性急剧下降。同样令人不安的是,大约四分之一的伙伴国比较出现了错误的信号。也就是说,一个国家报告的离岸价(f.o.b)出口超过了报告的成本-保险-运费(cif)合作伙伴的进口价值。除了产品构成之外,测试表明,伙伴国家的数据在估计贸易方向方面同样不准确。为什么伙伴国家的数据在近似“缺失”数据时如此不可靠?证据表明:1)报告或处理COMTRADE数据存在问题;2)进出口货物的估价差异(离岸价与到岸价);(三)与转口贸易、出口加工区原产出口有关的问题;4)与汇率变化有关的问题;5)产品有意或无意误分类;6)出于专有原因“隐瞒”贸易数据;7)故意伪造贸易数据的经济激励。作者的结论是,利用伙伴国家数据提高贸易统计的一般质量或可得性的努力几乎没有希望,尽管这种资料在已知某一国家的贸易统计包含重大错误的具体情况下可能有用。只有通过改进每个国家的数据收集程序,才能在提高贸易统计的准确性和覆盖面方面取得重大进展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Are Partner-Country Statistics Useful for Estimating Missing Trade Data?
Because many developing countries fail to report trade statistics to the United Nations, there has been an interest in using partner-country data to fill these information gaps. The author used partner-country statistics for 30 developing countries to "estimate" actual (concealed) trade data and analyzed the magnitude of the resulting errors. The results indicate that partner-country data are unreliable even for estimating trade in broad aggregate product groups such as foodstuffs, fuels, or manufactures. Moreover, tests show that the reliability of partner-country statistics degenerates sharply as one moves to more finely distinguished trade categories (lower-level SITCs). Equally disturbing, about one-quarter of the partner-country comparisons take the wrong sign. That is, one country's reported free-on-board (f.o.b.) exports exceed the reported cost-insurance-freight (c.i.f.) value of partners' imports. Aside from product composition, tests show that partner-country data are equally inaccurate for estimating the direction of trade. Why are partner-country data so unreliable for approximating "missing" data? Evidence shows: 1) problems in reporting or processing COMTRADE data; 2) valuation differences (f.o.b. versus c.i.f.) for imports and exports; 3) problems relating to entrepot trade, or exports originating in export processing zones; 4) problems associated with exchange-rate changes; 5) intentional or unintentional misclassification of products; 6) efforts to "conceal" trade data for proprietary reasons; and 7) financial incentives to purposely falsify trade data. The author concludes that efforts to improve the general quality, or availability, of trade statistics using partner-country data holds little or no promise, although this information may be useful in specific cases where the trade statistics of a certain country are known to incorporate major errors. Significant progress in ugrading the accuracy, and coverage, of trade statistics can be achieved only by improving each country's procedures for data collection.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信