Main Article Content


This paper examines the factors affecting Uzbekistan's bilateral trade flows, especially the relationship between trade costs and trade volume over the past decade. It uses a variety of tests, a gravity model, and an OLS regression method. The obtained results are similar to the previous literature, but some unexpected results were observed. It also provides conclusions and recommendations for future problems through the analysis of the results obtained. The main independent variable trade cost showed its expected result. A percentage increase in trade costs will reduce Uzbekistan's bilateral trade volume by 0.03%. Its relationship with bilateral trade is negative and significant


bilateral trade trade costs tariffs exchange rate

Article Details

How to Cite
Shomurodov Tokhir Boymurod ugli, Karimova Latofat Sadullayevna, Ganiev Bakhtiyor Zulfikor ugli, Quziyeva Gulnoza Rashidovna, & Rahmonov Bekzod Sharibjon ugli. (2021). Analysis of relationship between trade costs and Uzbekistan`s bilateral trade: theories and concepts. International Journal on Economics, Finance and Sustainable Development, 3(3), 132-140.


  1. Anderson, E. James. and Yotov V.Yotov. " The Changing incidence of Geography." The American Economic Review, Vol 100, No.5: 2157-2186. 2010
  2. Anderson, James E. and Eric Van Wincoop. 2004. Trade Costs. Journal of Economic Literature, 42(3), 691-751.
  3. Anderson, James E., and Eric VanWincoop. 2003. Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to the Border Puzzle.
  4. Chi, T. and P. Kilduff. “An assessment of trends in China’s comparative advantages in textile machinery, man-made fibers, textiles and apparel”, Journal of the Textile Institute,Vol. 97 No. 2, pp. 173-91.2006
  5. Deardorff, A. "Determinants of Bilateral Trade : Does Gravity Work in a Neoclassical
  6. World?" In The Regionalization of the World
  7. Hausman, J. A."Specification Tests in Econometrics." Econometrica , 46(6):1251-1271.1978
  8. Head, K., T. Mayer and J. Ries, 2010, “The erosion of colonial trade linkages after independence” Journal of International Economics, 81(1):1-14. (formerly CEPII discussion paper # 2008-27)
  9. J.H. Bergstrand, “The Generalized Gravity Equation, Monopolistic Competition, and the Factor Proportions Th
  10. Obstfeld, Maurice, Rogoff, Kenneth, 2000. The six major puzzles in international
  11. macroeconomics: is there a common cause? NBER Macroeconomics Annual 2000,
  12. 339–390.
  13. Raballand, G., 2003, “ Determinants of the negative impact of being landlocked on trade: an empirical investigation through the Central Asian case“, Comparative Economic Studies 45: 520–536.
  14. Ramesh C. Paudel, ArushaCooray Export performance of developing countries: Does landlockedness matter? Rev Dev Econ. 2018;1–27.
  15. Suresh K G and NeerajAswal (2014). Determinants of India’s Manufactured Exports
  16. to South and North: A Gravity Model Analysis, International Journal of Economics
  17. and Financial Issues, 4(1), pp:144-151.
  18. Tinbergen, Jan (1962) Shaping the World Economy: Suggestions for an International Economic Policy, Twentieth Century Fund.
  19. Wondwosen, Tebekew (2014). A Panel Data Analysis for Bilateral Trade of Ethiopia
  20. and East African Community countries: The Gravity Model Approach. Addis Ababa.
  21. Bahmani-Oskooee, M., & Kantipong, T. (2018). Thailand-China commodity trade and exchange rate uncertainty: Asymmetric evidence from 45 industries The Journal of Economic Asymmetries 20 (2019) 660–672.
  22. Borchert, I., Yotov, Y.V., Distance, globalization, and international trade.
  23. Economics Letters (2017),
  24. Önsel Ekici, Şule, Özgür Kabak, and Füsun Ülengin. 2016. “Linking to Compete: Logistics and Global Competitiveness Interaction.” Transport Policy 48: 117–128.

Most read articles by the same author(s)