On the Consequences of Trade: Inequality, the Environment, and Aid

by Samuel Siewers
Doctoral thesis
Date of Examination:2025-04-23
Date of issue:2025-05-27
Advisor:Prof. Dr. Andreas Fuchs
Referee:Prof. Dr. Krisztina Kis-Katos
Referee:Prof. Dr. Rachael Garrett
Persistent Address: http://dx.doi.org/10.53846/goediss-11256

 

 

Files in this item

Name:Siewers_PhD_Dissertation.pdf
Size:9.21Mb
Format:PDF

The following license files are associated with this item:

Abstract

English

This dissertation analyzes, empirically, the consequences of international trade along three dimensions: economic inequality, the environment, and international aid. First, building upon the argument that factor endowments influence distributional outcomes, Chapter 1 examines the consequences of the “other” China shock—that is, the repercussions of the surge in Chinese demand, mostly for agricultural commodities—for economic inequality in Brazilian municipalities. It proposes a new identification strategy that exploits plausibly exogenous variation in demand for soybeans based on fluctuations in the size of the pig stock in China and shows that the proceeds of this China-driven agricultural bonanza have been rather unequally distributed. Chapter 2 turns to the environmental consequences of trade. Based on new survey data for firms in Central Asia, Eastern Europe, Middle East, and North Africa, it examines the link between global value chains (GVCs) and firms’ environmental performance. Using propensity score matching (PSM) to compare similar companies that differ in terms of GVC participation, the analysis underscores the importance of proper environmental regulation and shows that firms that join GVCs perform better across several environmental indicators. Finally, Chapter 3 investigates the effects of trade and geopolitical competition for the provision of humanitarian assistance in the aftermath of natural disasters. Based on a trilateral panel of daily humanitarian aid decisions following more than 500 fast-onset natural disasters, it shows that donor countries take faster aid decisions if they have stronger strategic interests at stake. The analysis, which relies on daily variation in donor responses, reveals a bandwagon effect, largely explained by commercial competition.
Keywords: Inequality; China shock; Deforestation; Sustainability; Global value chains; Environmental regulation; Disaster relief; Humanitarian assistance; Trade competition; Soy boom
 
Statistik