Reveals how free trade agreements influence export efficiency in China, suggesting improved strategies.
Against the backdrop of the continued expansion of regional trade agreements worldwide, although China has signed numerous free trade agreements (FTAs), systematic empirical evidence on how different FTAs affect export efficiency remains limited. Using a stochastic frontier gravity model (SFGM), this study examines the relationship between FTAs and China’s export efficiency based on panel data covering China’s exports to 80 major trading partners over the period 2000–2024. The analysis further explores heterogeneity across trading partners in terms of regional characteristics and levels of economic development, thereby providing a comprehensive assessment of structural differences in export efficiency. The results indicate that, among the FTAs included in the analysis, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) and the China–Chile Free Trade Agreement (CCHFTA) are significantly associated with lower trade inefficiency, suggesting that China’s exports to these partners are closer to the potential trade frontier. In contrast, most other FTAs do not exhibit statistically significant differences, and some are associated with higher trade inefficiency, indicating considerable variation in efficiency performance across China’s existing FTA network. Further analysis reveals persistent structural differences in export efficiency across regions and development levels, with relatively higher efficiency observed for Oceania and North America, while South America and Africa show comparatively lower levels. At the same time, differentiated trade strategies should be adopted for trading partners with different regional characteristics and development levels, in order to optimize export structure and better realize potential trade capacity. The findings provide empirical evidence for improving China’s FTA network and enhancing export efficiency.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Feng et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: