THE ROLE OF INSTITUTIONS IN PROMOTING VIETNAM'S TRADE EFFICIENCY
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study aims to evaluate the impact of institutional quality and institutional similarity on Vietnam's export efficiency during the period 2002–2022. Based on Vietnam’s export data to its trading partners, the study employs the Stochastic Frontier Analysis (SFA) model to estimate export efficiency, and the System Generalized Method of Moments (sys-GMM) to examine the effects of institutional factors. The results show that both domestic institutional quality and institutional similarity with partner countries have a positive impact on export efficiency. Regional analysis reveals significant differences: in Asia, export efficiency remains low despite high institutional similarity; in European markets, regulatory harmonization plays a crucial role in unlocking export potential; and in the Americas, both domestic institutional reforms and enhanced institutional compatibility are important. These findings suggest that institutional reforms should be flexibly designed, region-specific, and tailored to the characteristics of each target export market.
Keywords
Export efficiency, institutional quality, stochastic frontier analysis, GMM, Vietnam.
Article Details
References
[2] T. N. Doan, Y. Xing (2018), Trade efficiency, free trade agreements and rules of origin, Journal of Asian Economics, (55):33-41, doi: 10.1016/j.asieco.2017.12.007.
[3] M. M. Stack, E. J. Pentecost, and G. Ravishanka (2018), A Stochastic Frontier Analysis of Trade Efficiency for the New EU Member States: Implications of Brexit, Economic Issues, (23):35-53.
[4] J. R. Lott, D. C. North (1992), Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 11(1), doi: 10.2307/3325144.
[5] O. E. Williamson (2000), The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking Ahead, Journal of Economic Literature, 38(3):595-613, doi: 10.1257/jel.38.3.595.
[6] D. Kaufmann, A. Kraay, M. Mastruzzi (2011), The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Methodology and Analytical Issues, Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 3(02):220-246, doi: 10.1017/s1876404511200046.
[7] N. T. H. Hai D. N. Thang (2017), The ASEAN Free Trade Agreement and Vietnam’s Trade Efficiency, Asian Social Science, 13(4), doi:10.5539/ass. v13n4p192.
[8] S. P. Armstrong (2007), Measuring Trade and Trade Potential: A Survey, SSRN Electronic Journal, doi: 10.2139/ssrn.1760426.
[9] S. Abbas, A. Waheed (2019), Pakistan’s Global Trade Potential: A Gravity Model Approach, Global Business Review, 20(6):1361-1371, doi:10.1177/0972150 919848936.
[10] G. E. Battese, T. J. Coelli (1988), Prediction of firm-level technical efficiencies with a generalized frontier production function and panel data, Journal of Econometrics, 38(3):387-399, doi:10.1016/0304-4076(88)90053-x.
[11] R. Blundell, S. Bond (1998), Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models, Journal of Econometrics, 87(1):115-143, doi:10.1016/s0304-4076(98)00009-8.
[12] A. Liu, C. Lu, Z. Wang (2020), The roles of cultural and institutional distance in international trade: Evidence from China's trade with the Belt and Road countries, China Economic Review, (61), doi: 10.1016/j.chieco.2018.10.001.
[13] H. L. F. De Groot, G. J. Linders, P. Rietveld, U. Subramanian (2004), The Institutional Determinants of Bilateral Trade Patterns, Kyklos, 57(1):103-123, doi: 10.1111/j.0023-5962.2004.00245.x.