Analysis of International Trade (1988 to 2016)

Compilation of Term Project Reports of students of General Management Programme for

Young Leaders (YLP) in Statistics for Business Course

August 2018

Indian Institute of Management Bangalore

Bannerghatta Road Bangalore 560076
Group Title
1 Study of International Trade, Import, Export from World Bank for period 1988-2016 on
SAARC & European Countries
2 Import-Export Analysis of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh
3 Top Influencers of the Global Trade Balance (2001-2016)
4 Forecasting Trade and Economic Growth Analysis for Asia (2000-2016)
5 Forecasting Trade and Analyzing Market Trends through Trade Balance
6 Effects of the 2008 Crisis on Select Countries
7 Descriptive Measures of Top 10 Importing and Exporting Nations
8 OPEC and ASEAN Nations- Trade Surplus analysis (1988-2016)
9 International Trade Summary (1988-2016)
10 The Economic Crisis & India’s Export Trend
11 Globalization and Its Impact on Export Import Trade on India Vs the Big Four
12 Analysis of Economic Growth of India With Its Neighboring Countries
13 Study on Current Account Balance of G7 countries (1988-2016)
14 Global Trade Watch (2001-2016) - A perspective on global economics
15 Analysis of International Trade – North America And China
16 Top Global Traders Vs. Oil Export Giants
17 G7 and BRICS Nations Balance of Trade Analysis – 2007 to 2016
18 World Trade Analysis 1988-2016
19 Effect of recession on contribution to total trade
20 International Trade statistics
21 SAARC Nations Trade Analysis 1988-2016
22 Effect of Global Recession 2008 on Net Exports
23 A Study on International Trade Between 1992 - 2016
24 Sub-Saharan & Mena Under Opec Trade Deficit Analysis & Textile Export Analysis
(1988-2016)
25 The Global Financial Crisis and Its Impact On Trade
 Group Details

Group Group Group

Names Names Names
No No No
1 Aarav Bajaj 2 Akita Jain 3 Arpit Jain
Abhinav Mohan Ansar Magdum Arunabh Bhattacharjee
Abhishek Reddy Anugya Arunima Verma
Aishwarya Aparna Bala Adithya
Ajay Shresti Apeksha Sharma Bharath Nayak M
Akarsh Srivastava Aradhana Soni Bhavya Shanmugam

Dalai Roopdhar Nanda

4 5 Harshil Dhruve 6 Lalitha Sree Naidu V K
Goutham
Debonita Goswami Kanika Thakur Manohar B C V S
Divya Pareek Keerthi R V Manu Shankar
Swaroop HS Kiran CR Mohammed Yusuf
Gangothri Nagaraj Kiran Patil Moumita Nath
Gaurav Kumbhare Krishna Mohan Muthunarayanan

7 Neha Dharwar 8 Priyank Singh 9 Sasmita Dash

Niladri Chakravarty Rahul Chaturvedi Shahed Shaik
Nishanta Kumar Samal Rani Singh Shivangi Sinha
Padmavati PT Ratna Hubli Shivansh Shrivastava
Payal Sadhwani Rohit Mehta Shravan Kumar
Prakash Kumar Shrey Gupta

10 Shriti Sinha 11 Harith S 12 Adithya AA

Sri Ranjitha Yerramilli Swarup Ravichandran K Pramod Nandan
Suhail Ayub Sweta Pathak Pradeep Kunchinadka
Suhasini Basu Utkarsh Sinha Prerana Sridhar
Supriya Nanda Vishal Kaushal Yoga Nandh Sudershan
Swaroop Sagar Vivek Jyothi Nagendra Kumar
Zubairkhan Kittur

13 K Karthick Balaji 14 Khusheeba Fayaz 15 Aashray Ajay Sharma

Kaushik Velsamy Haren Chelle Anvesh Vemula
Sahil Santosh Kaushik Rai Asish Kumar Sabat
Sarayu KM Lolini Atluri Raghavendra D
Shubha Mani Mohammed Kashaan Sravani Yarlagadda
Srikanth Miriyala Meenaakshi Nair Srikanth Chepyala
T. Kiruba Shankar Priyanka Vucha Suraj Tiwari
Group Group Group
Names Names Names
No No No
16 Debdatta Biswas 17 Navil Nagda 18 Naveen
Mohit Behal Sarvesh Pimpalkar Palak Agrawal
Pratik Priyadarshi Saurabh Santosh Shrirang
Rohit Jaiswal Shivam Anwekar Uma Anand Takbhate
Sahil Jain Sukanya Shettigar Upasana Goyal
Shivika Seksaria Tejasvita Singh Vibhu Gupta

19 Krishna Kanth 20 Amrit Juneja 21 Jaspreet Singh Rajpal

Piyush Ranjan Ankit Bansal Pallavi Trikha
Rahul Gupta Arushi Sharma Rishab Garg
Tushar Gulhati Debasis Ray Sreenath R
Utkarsha Kalra Akash Kumar Abheek Ku Chakraborty
Yashashvi Goel

22 Anjali Patidar 23 Anand Uttrani 24 Anil George

Ashish Agrawal Eshaan Ajay Ishita Mishra
Anhima Budholia Manish Chetry Mukesh Pratap Singh
Nazhat Kittur Prateek Chauhan Thomson
Pradhuman Shukla Shreyans Jain Vijay N
Rahul Gopal Joshi Akhil Reddy Vipin P. Subramoniam

25 Lokapriya V Ramya N Smitha KS

Maslekar Ankita Ramesh M Rajesha, HT
Naga Bhargavi
 Trends in International Trade
Given below is the summary of the findings of 25 groups of IIMB-YLP students who examined export and
import data of countries during the last 30 years to demonstrate their learnings in Business Statistics course.

1. India dominates SAARC countries in international trade. Post liberalization in 1991, the mean export
value of India has increased to USD 124 billion against pre-liberalization export value of USD 5.9
billion.
2. Till 2011, India, Pakistan and Bangladesh were showing an uptrend in both export and imports. In the
last five years, international trade (exports and imports) of India and Pakistan are shrinking whereas
Bangladesh continues to maintain the uptrend. Though smaller in size (population and area), Bangladesh
exports are more than Pakistan.
3. Till 2008, the international trade was moving smoothly upward but since 2009 on account of financial
market crisis, the international trade turned downward, volatile and unpredictable. While China, German
and few other smaller European countries are net exporters, most other countries are net importers.
4. Among 32 Asian countries studied, 21 are net importers while other 11 are net exporters. Countries that
top on imports are Turkey, India and Singapore. Top three net exporters are China, Germany and Japan.
5. USA is the largest importer of the world. Among the five product segments studied (Capital goods,
Consumer goods, Chemicals, Food products and miscellaneous), consumer goods takes a lion share of
the trade deficit for the country. In capital goods, which is the next large component of trade, the imports
and exports are almost equal.
6. Among the top eight countries in the world trade, the balance of trade of Canada turned surplus to
marginal deficit whereas Italy posted surplus. The financial market crisis has not affected the balance
of trade of Canada, France, Italy and UK.
7. For several countries, the mean values of exports and imports are more than median values. It shows
rapid expansion of international trade during the period due to opening up of borders for international
trade.
8. Export and import data of OPEC countries are volatile and right skewed due to high value of exports in
few years on account of high oil price. This results in large trade surplus for OPEC countries. On the
other hand, ASEAN countries exports are diversified but its balance of trade are surplus in few years
and deficit in other years.
9. China and US dominate the world trade as exporter and importer respectively. The trade surplus of
China is almost mirror image of US imports.
10. India’s export and import are in line with other countries. Till 2008, India’s international trade expanded
rapidly but post financial market crisis, it shows a declining trend. Like many countries, the recovery
of international trade in 2009 was temporary.
11. The largest exporter of the world till 2004 was the USA but it lost its tag in 2005 to China. Since then
China consolidated its position and increased its export by 2.5 times in the next 12 years. The highly
skewed balance of trade is not sustainable and creates tension between the countries.
12. China is traditionally trade surplus country and it exploited the trade liberalization in the year 2000.
India could not follow and exploit the opportunity due to lack of infrastructure development and high
oil and gold imports.
13. G7 countries have moved from trade surplus countries to trade deficit countries during the last two
decades and mainly caused by USA. The other six G7 countries try to balance their international trade
with their export nearing imports.
14. There is a remarkable shift in the international trade from developed economies to emerging economies.
The share of Asian countries in the international trade, both export and import significantly increased in
21st Century.
15. While China’s export increased more than 12 times, the export of North America has increased 3 times
during the last three decades. The outcome of this shift is China’s export surpassed the total export of
North America. On imports, China imports half the value of imports of North America. The result is
wide trade gap between the two large economies. If this imbalanced international trade continues for
longer time, it may cause economic tension among the countries.
16. Apart from China, Germany, Japan, Russia and Saudi Arabia have been in a constant trade surplus over
the years. With China’s aggressive international trade practices, it is difficult to predict how long these
trade surplus countries will retain their trade surplus status.
17. The G7 countries as a group exports more than the exports of BRICS countries but the scale of import
of G7 countries are much larger than the imports of BIRCS. This results in large trade deficit for G7
countries and trade surplus for BRICS. Among BRICS countries, only China shows trade surplus
overshadowing all other countries in the group.
18. After 2008 financial market crisis, the international trade of almost all countries are affected in 2009
resulting a dip in the export and import value. Though the international trade recovered in 2010, it is
more or less flat for the next five years but started declining during 2015 and 2016. It may take many
years before we return to growth path in the international trade
19. While US, Japan and EU took a hit during the great recession, on the contrary, the contribution of
Asian/developing countries increased from 34% to 47% during the same period. This shows developed
economies are more vulnerable to recession compared to developing economies.
20. Iraq and Greece have experience political and economic crisis at different points of time. Though crisis
affected their international trade during around the crisis period, both countries recovered and returned
to normal days.
21. India dominates international trade of SAARC countries consisting of eight countries around India.
While all SAARC countries are in trade deficit (import exceeding export), Bangladesh might turn trade
surplus if the current export growth continues. In contrast, with export is and import increasing, Pakistan
may witness economic crisis like the one which India witnessed in 1991.
22. While financial markets crisis in 2008 has affected the international trade of several countries, Finland,
Hungary and New Zealand turned trade surplus. The export of Denmark, Peru and Russian Federation
have also increased manifold after financial market crisis though these countries continue to be in trade
deficit.
23. As most of the developing countries of the world initiated economic reforms and liberalization to
stimulate their growth rate and amplify trade potential, China capitalized the opportunity and reached
an enviable position in the international trade. Other developing like India, Qatar and Brazil exhibit a
consistent trade growth over the years.
24. Despite being part of The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), the two sub-
groups MENA and Sub-Saharan countries continue to show huge trade deficit.
25. Germany is driving the Eurozone’s fragile economic recovery. Though UK and Netherlands have
similar mean values of exports, Netherlands achieved significant improvement in exports over the years
while controlling imports. In contrast, UK’s export is stagnating while imports are growing.
 Group 1: Study of International Trade, Import, Export from World Bank for period
1988-2016 on SAARC & European Countries

Abstract

India dominates SAARC countries in international trade. Post liberalization in 1991, the mean export value of
India has increased to USD 124 billion against pre-liberalization export value of USD 5.9 billion.

Introduction

SAARC - The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) is the regional intergovernmental
organization and geopolitical union of nations in South Asia. Its member states include Afghanistan,
Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Nepal, the Maldives, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. SAARC comprises 3% of the world's
area, 21% of the world's population and 3.8% (US$2.9 trillion) [1] of the global economy, as of 2015.

Global Economic crisis - The financial crisis of 2007–2008, also known as the global financial crisis and the
2008 financial crisis, is considered by many economists to have been the worst financial crisis since the Great
Depression of the 1930s

We have identified 4 topics that we found as a highlight while navigating through the data obtained from the
world bank site. Please find below our key finding(s):

1. India is the MAJOR contributor to SAARC countries Total Imports & Exports

FIG 1: TOTAL IMPORTS OF INDIA AND OTHER SAARC COUNTRIES

 ● India dominates at 1.08 Trillion USD/per year on average in the period 1988-2016 in Imports & 1.4
Trillion USD/per year on average Exports vs. it’s SAARC counterparts Afghanistan, Bangladesh,
Bhutan, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka. Above chart indicates a ‘white space’ problem. India’s
Import % contribution to SAARC Total stood at an astounding 73% & export % contribution was 77%,
being the obvious outlier in dataset.

Conclusion: India, un arguably the largest contributor to the SAARC Import Export. Mean of exports among
SAARC countries for the period between 1988-2016 was 17 million vs 108 million for India during the same
period.

2. Effect of US Financial Meltdown of 2008-09 on European Countries International Trade

FIG 2: IMPORTS OF EUROPEAN COUNTRIES (IN USD) BETWEEN 1988-2016

Table 1: Effect of US Financial Crisis on European International trade during 2008-09

EU Country % Drop in Exports 08-09 % Drop in Imports 08-09
France -18.95 -21.06
Germany -22.25 -23.82
Netherlands -24.30 -21.64
Portugal -21.33 -15.67
Spain -28.30 -21.75
Sweden -28.36 -29.67
Switzerland -14.41 -15.13
United Kingdom -23.32 -24.73
After a period of robust expansion of economies across the world till 2007, a real estate crisis broke out in the
US, the US financial crisis became global. It primarily affected the economies of the United States, but the
‘domino effect’ (the cumulative effect produced when one event sets off a chain of similar events) spillover of
the crisis was unexpectedly powerful. The financial crisis has hit the European Union to a strong degree, as we
can see leading to a decline of nearly 23% in the exports of the European Countries. The global financial crisis
affected the real economy in Central and Eastern European Union.

● The downturn in the global economy, affected imports (refer Fig 1). France, Germany, Netherlands,
Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland & UK had a drop in imports ranging from 15%(Portugal) to nearly
30%(Sweden).
● Exports fell from 14%(Switzerland) to 28%(Sweden).

Conclusion: The global financial meltdown had severely affected the exports of countries like Netherlands
(reduce in exports by 25% in the period of 08-09) and Sweden ( -28% in the same period). It also influenced
the imports as the price of raw materials (Country like Germany noticed a fall of 23% in its imports during the
year 08-09)

3.India Pre-1991 and Post-1991 Performance in Imports and Exports.

● The 1991 economic crisis in

India was a result of balance
of payments problems as
imports were more than the
exports that initially
originated in the previous
decade i.e. pre-1991 leaving
the country in a twin deficit.
Before 1991, the average
exports of India were 5.9
billion USD annually and
Imports were swelling leading
to large and growing fiscal
imbalances.
FIG 3: INDIA’S IMPEX DATA PRE AND POST 1991 During the year 1991, our exports shot
● Also, this was the year, where the Indian exports were more up to 12.1 billion USD (105% over the
than imports (12.1 billion USD (exports) vs. 8.5 billion USD average export compared to previous
years).
(imports)). There are certain pockets of time after 1991, where
the trend of our exports continued to be more than our imports but as the years forwarded our supply could
 not match with the increasing demand for resources, goods and materials making India a consumption
driven economy.
Conclusion: The 1991 economic crisis was a blessing in disguise for the country which helped increase
the overall exports (The mean of exports for the period between 1992 – 2016 being 124 billion USD,
whereas the mean of export before the year 1991 was 5.9 billion USD).

4. Study on Bhutan’s Impex Data.

● The average export for Bhutan is around 93 million USD, during the period between 2002 – 2007 we
can notice a steady uptrend in the exports (average of 127 million USD during this period, which being
36% more than the total average) owing to friendly pacts like the India-Bhutan Friendship Treaty (2007),
which has helped open the Bhutan export market.
● One can also notice that during the period between 2006 -2008, the Bhutanese exports were more than
that of the import. The global economic downturn also had a big impact on the export which was seeing
a big uptrend over the previous years. The export dropped from 306 million USD in 2007 to 135 million
USD in 2008 (a drop of 55% over the previous year).

FIG 4: BHUTAN’S IMPEX DATA BETWEEN 1988-2016

 Group 2: Import-Export Analysis of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh

Abstract

Till 2011, India, Pakistan and Bangladesh were showing an uptrend in both export and imports. In the last five
years, international trade (exports and imports) of India and Pakistan are shrinking whereas Bangladesh
continues to maintain the uptrend. Though smaller in size (population and area), Bangladesh exports are more
than Pakistan.

Introduction
International trade has changed our world over the last couple of centuries. In this report we analyze available
data on historical trade patterns for the period of 1988-2016 for India, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Let’s have a
look at the measures of centrality and dispersion in the table below.

Key Findings
1. Import Analysis:

• To reduce the “White space” issue originating due to high Indian import values, we have included a
secondary axis in the chart to depict Indian import values.
• Just like Import, we can see tremendous growth in the Export trend for these countries in the above chart.
• We see highest increase in Import values of India of 5196% from 1988 to 2016. This happened mostly
after the Global economic slowdown in 2008. With the emergence of many SMEs the import is declining
gradually.
• Pakistan’s Export trend reveals a huge increase in 2001-08. This was because of the trade liberalization
policies during this period.
 • If we compare the Year-On-Year change in import for these countries, we see a major spike in 1989 due
to reformed trade strategies adopted by all 3 countries. We see a downfall in 2009 due to the Global
economic crisis. After 2011, the data does not vary as compared to previous years.

2. Export Analysis:

• Pakistan’s Export trend reveals a decline after 2011. This was due to economic and political reforms after
the 2011-12 period.
• The Export trend for past 3 decades show an exponential growth for all the 3 countries.
• While Bangladesh is continuously increasing the exports, we see a downfall in the exports for India and
Pakistan in the latest years. The downfall in exports for these countries will lead to an increase in dollar
value and increase in oil prices.
• Even after highest Export Mean of 108 for India, there has been an exponential increase of 16669% for
Bangladesh from 1988 to 2016.
 • For India we see a downfall in the exports, due to the increased Oil prices (higher demand) in recent
years. This also leads to an increased Exchange rate and hence the Indian export is on a collapsing trend
• If we compare the Year-On-Year change in export for these countries, we can see a major spike in 2010
due to the increase in tourism for these countries. The export trend for all of these countries would be
right skewed owing to a better manufacturing and export growth.

Inferences
In the last decade, we have seen changes in the trade patterns for these 3 countries.

Bangladesh is running a consistent trade economy with almost equal import and export. India has bigger share
in Import as compared to the Export values. Pakistan shows a Current Account Deficit as import exceeds export.
According to the WTO reports, India is currently ranked as the 20th largest exporter and 14th largest importer
in the world as per the 2016 data. This has been due to the emergence of a large number of small and medium
enterprises with their overseas business operations which lead to a multifold increase in India’s foreign trade.
This trend can be adopted by all the countries to achieve Trade Surplus economy and increase their overall
exports.
 Group 3: Top Influencers of The Global Trade Balance (2001-2016)
Abstract

Till 2008, the international trade was moving smoothly upward but since 2009 on account of financial market
crisis, the international trade turned downward, volatile and unpredictable. While China, German and few other
smaller European countries are net exporters, most other countries are net importers.
Introduction
This report aims at understanding Global Trade data from the World Bank’s website, containing Regional and
Country-wise Import & Export receipts per year in Billions of US Dollars. We have focused on the top regions,
top contributors to each region, and their influence on the global Balance of Trade (BOT = Exports - Imports).
We have also looked at the variations in the Trade Balance of the countries. We have considered data from
2001-2016 for this study.

Figure 1: Showing the crisis of 2008-2009 and the 2013-2016 slowdown

• Figure 1: We see the Global Exports growing from 6.2 to 14.7 Trillion US$, at an average growth rate of
7% YoY Notably, a 23% decline in overall exports after 2008, followed by the rapid recovery of 22% over
(2009 – 2011), after which Global Trade has slowed down (2012 – 2016), with an average decline of 5% in
overall exports.
• Hence, we have aggregated the years into the ranges (2001-2006), (2007-2011) and (2012-2016).

Region and Country Contribution

Figure 2: Average Region Wise Trade Contribution Figure 3: Top Contributing Countries to Global Trade by Mean
 • Figure 2: The Pareto chart shows Average Exports as a % of Total, with top 3 contributing regions being
Europe & Central-Asia (39%), East-Asia and Pacific (24%) and North-America (16%). Contributions of
these 3 regions aggregate to ~80% of the overall trade and closely influence the world trade balance.
• Figure 3: Looking at the top countries by Average Imports & Exports in Billions US$ (ranging from 143 to
1596), we see the leaders as China, USA and Germany.

Balance of Trade Influence

• Figure 4 & 5: From the Average Balance of Trade per region (BOT = Exports - Imports) for three
time periods (2001-2006), (2007-2011) & (2012-2016) - we can see an overall Trade Deficit (Imports
> Exports, i.e a negative trade balance) for North America & Europe and a Trade Surplus (Exports >
Imports, i.e a positive trade balance) for East Asia and Pacific. The Average Balance of Trade has
increased significantly for China beating Exports in East Asia, and a steady rise in the exports for
Germany.
• We also see a close alignment of North America and Asia as regions with United States and China
respectively. United States and China show a clear growing trend in their opposing trade balances, with
US increasing Imports, and China increasing Exports, therefore affecting the overall Trade Balance of
the world.
• The standard deviations of the above time periods, along with the overall standard deviation (2001-
2016) has been calculated, showing more volatility in Europe as compared to Germany. China’s high
Standard deviation is due to its immense and unpredictable growth as compared to its region (East Asia
& Pacific).

Germany
Figure 4: US and China Influence their regions. Germany opposes Europe.

Figure 5: Balance of Trade between Region and Top Country Figure 6: European Trade Surplus
• Germany is the outlier in Europe with an opposing trade balance with respect to the region, a net Exporter
(with Trade surplus) and the rest of Europe spending more on Imports. The other net exporters in Europe
were Ireland, Sweden and Hungary but had much lesser net exports as compared to Germany. Germany’s
overall variation (Standard deviation) compared to other regions and countries is the lowest (82) as seen
above.
• From the summary statistics – Germany shows the decline in variation (std. deviation) from 43-35-16 (Billion
US$), with a trade surplus and remains to be unaffected by the 2008 crisis.
• This lowering of variability in its trade balance confirms that
it has been a predictable economy when compared to US and China.
• Comparing (1988-2000) and (2001-2016)’s shape we can see that Germany’s Balance has shifted more
aggressively to an export based economy – looking at the change in skewness. In 1988, it had very little
difference between imports and exports (7) and was right skewed more towards imports:exports (Mean 37 >
Median 33). Between 2001-2016, it was left skewed towards more exports:imports (Median 223 > Mean
214). 2007 was the most aggressive year for Germany’s trade surplus.
•

Figure 7: Germany’s Growth from 1988-2016

Conclusion

• The three major regions account to 80% of the Total Global trade flow. The Balance of Trade (BOT)
describes the type of economy driving consumption in a country and within a region, whether Export driven
or Import driven.
• The top countries of these regions according to percentile rankings, China, USA & Germany, closely affect
their regional trade balances. China and USA directly align with East Asia and North America. The gap
between China and US can clearly be seen increasing, with China’s global growing Trade Surplus & United
States’ growing Trade deficit causing tension between the countries now battling for trade supremacy.
• Germany is a clear outlier in Europe, and has always had a large Trade Surplus compared to the others. It
has gathered momentum over the years 2001-2016 and showed very low variability in its trade balance,
confirming stability and predictability.
 Group 4: Forecasting Trade and Economic Growth Analysis for Asia (2000-2016)
Abstract
Among 32 Asian countries studied, 21 are net importers while other 11 are net exporters. Countries that top on
imports are Turkey, India and Singapore. Top three net exporters are China, Germany and Japan.

Introduction
Asia, being the largest continent in the world, has demonstrated a greater openness to trade and investment over
the years. This has helped the continent to attain a predominant position in the international trade over the past
decades evidencing a vital role in world economy. The purpose of this report is to analyze and demonstrate the
export and import trend of major Asian countries during the period of 2000-2016, considering a major share of
Asia in the Global economy. The data source is obtained from the World Bank website. In this analysis, a large
volume of export and import data is transformed into comprehensive fragments to view the performance of 32
Asian countries in the world trade.
Statistics measures of Centrality and Dispersion are applied to arrive at consummate results that show
variations in exports and imports of countries that appear to have close averages. The report also projects the
Surplus and Deficit in countries for which we have substantial data over a specific period.

1)Export Analysis: Countries with closest mean considered for export analysis as per the below table

As per the above graph, there is a "White Space" due to Saudi Arabia and Malaysia. Hence, these countries
have been excluded from the analysis and the focus was more on, clustered data. Qatar and Kuwait have the
highest relative multiplication factor of 0.62 for variance as per Table 1 above. This was factored-in to analyse
which among the two countries have more risk factor in forecasting the exports.
As per Table1, Mean>Median for both Qatar and Kuwait. It is right skewed data. That depicts, the tail of exports
distribution on the right-hand side is longer than the left-hand side which is driving the mean upward. Skewness
is inversely proportional to Standard deviation and hence, we see the smaller Skewness for Qatar in comparison
to Kuwait.
Conclusion: Above analysis depicts, variability in export data of Kuwait is lesser than Qatar. Hence, the risk
involved in forecasting exports for Kuwait is less and more stable (considerable fluctuations) when compared
to Qatar. Also, Range of export is less in the case of Kuwait when compared to Qatar which justifies the minimal
variations in Kuwait exports over the years.

2)Import Analysis: Countries with closest mean considered for import analysis as per the below table

As per the above graph, there is a "White Space" due to Saudi Arabia and Indonesia. Hence, these countries
have been excluded from the analysis and the focus was more on, clustered data. Oman and Lebanon have the
highest relative multiplication factor of 0.57 for variance as per Table 2 above. This was factored-in to analyse
which among the two countries have more risk factor in forecasting the imports.
Conclusion: Above analysis depicts, variability in import data of Lebanon is lesser than Oman. Hence, the
risk involved in forecasting imports for Lebanon is less and more stable (considerable fluctuations) when
compared to Oman. Also, Range of import is less in the case of Lebanon compared to Oman which justifies
the minimal variations in Lebanon imports.

3)Trade Analysis (Surplus/ Deficit in exchange of goods and services of 32 Asian countries):

Conclusion: Trade Deficit for Turkey is more than the other countries in Asia as per the Deficit graph above.
This represents an outflow of domestic currency to foreign markets. This is substantiated by greater imports of
goods and services by Turkey than 29 Asian countries. However, Japan and China are the only countries above
Turkey in import calculations between 2000-2016. This is proven by the surplus for China and Japan in the
Surplus graph above.
Trade Surplus for China is more than other Asian countries as per the Surplus graph. It represents the net inflow
of domestic currency from foreign markets. Trade surplus helps China to strengthen currency relative to other
Asian countries, affecting exchange rates.
 Group 5: Forecasting Trade and Analyzing Market Trends through Trade Balance

Abstract
USA is the largest importer of the world. Among the five product segments studied (Capital goods, Consumer
goods, Chemicals, Food products and miscellaneous), consumer goods takes a lion share of the trade deficit for
the country. In capital goods, which is the next large component of trade, the imports and exports are almost
equal.

Introduction
The technique of closer means is deployed for the trade period (1988-2004) for arriving at countries with lower
risks and to capture capability of accurate forecasting of Exports and Imports based on trend. Later we shall
deploy the Balance of Trade analysis on “North America” for the trade period (2000-2016) to arrive at some
key conclusions across different product lines.

1. Closer Mean Technique (1988-2004) Fig(a), Fig(b), Fig(c) and Skewness plot explains this approach.
Shortlisted countries which had closest means were, Netherlands, Mali, Belize, Greenland, Nepal, Aruba,
Bahamas, Cuba, Papua, Yemen, Macao, Bahrain, Libya and Vietnam.

Fig(a): Export data of countries with Fig(b) Countries with closer Means Fig(c) Variation plot
of the
Closer means between 1988-2004 and whose variation is significant two countries in
Fig(b)

In Fig(a), there is a "White space" which means for the analysis and future world forecasts, export data of Libya
and Vietnam can be excluded and focus can be on the clustered / stacked data. In Fig(b), though Means of
Exports of Nepal and Greenland are close (0.438 Mn$ and 0.437 Mn$ respectively), Export variance of Nepal
is approx. 7.56 times that of Greenland. This implies, variability in Export data of Greenland is lesser than
Nepal. Hence, the Risk involved in forecasting Exports for next quarters from Greenland is less and more stable
(manageable alteration) when compared to Nepal (severe fluctuations). Similar analysis can be extrapolated to
the study of import forecasting across countries. An analysis for both these countries (1988-2004) based on
skewness is as below:

The Skewness plot on to the left compares the distance between mean and median for the countries as below:
1. Greenland: Mean – Median = -$2,083
2. Nepal: Mean – Median = +$28,374
The mean is lesser than median in Greenland indicating a left skewed data and in the case of Nepal, the mean is greater
than median indicating a right skewed data. In this plot, there are export values for eight years pulling the mean downward
for Greenland and in Nepal, there are export values for eight years pulling the mean upward.

2. Trade Balance
2.1. Trade Deficit and Trade Surplus is calculated for North America from 2000-2016 to understand its
economy (by considering all product exports to the World and imports from the World) as shown in Fig(d)
and Fig(e).

Fig(d) Trade Deficit (Bn $) of North America Fig(e) Import & Export Trends in North America

In Fig(d), USA has the highest trade deficit as marked by the negative green spike. This implies that, people of
USA are affluent enough to purchase goods other than what the country produces. USA can be considered as a
growing economy due to this large deficit. But USA's dollar demand in terms of international trade will be on
the decline; In Fig(e), Canada is a superior exporter in North America as compared to other countries due to
the trade surplus; Also in Fig(d), it is clearly seen that, after the massive deficit in USA, there was a sudden
increase in exports of Mexico and Canada mainly due to the trade surplus of 0.31 Bn$ and 0.15 Bn$ respectively.

2.2. Since USA had the highest deficit in North America as shown in Fig(d), we go down a level deeper by
analyzing the Trade Balance of USA (Year 2000-2016), product-wise as shown in Fig(g) and Fig(h).

Fig(g) Trade Balance of Capital Goods Fig(h) Trade Balance of Capital Goods v/s rest of the goods

As in Fig(g), Capital goods of the United States were imported in abundance. It rose from 2.06 Bn$ in the year
2000 to 3.05 Bn$ in 2016. This was mainly due to the trade deficit. When capital goods were being imported in
abundance, parallelly even the consumer goods were being imported in much bigger volume (as in Fig(h)) due
to which the import value of consumer goods was close to 1.2 times that of capital goods. This is best described
by the much more growth deficit (i.e. 2.09 Bn$ to 6.85 Bn$) as in Fig(h). Later, as the growth deficit started
diminishing in magnitude (i.e. -6.85 to -0.32), the imports dropped from 11.61 Bn$ to 2.38 Bn$. The goods
imported for 2.38 Bn$ was primarily Chemicals. When the food products were being imported, the growth
deficit diminished even more which explains the rise of the Balance of Trade (BOT) line from -0.32 to -0.22.
Further, there was a slight increase in the growth deficit that increased the imports (of miscellaneous products)
by 4.8 times (i.e. 0.72 Bn $ of Food product imports to 3.51 Bn $ of miscellaneous product imports).

Inferences
1. Between 1988-2004, using closer mean technique we can infer that, Libya and Vietnam can alter the analysis
due to imposing peaks and hence must be eliminated from the analysis. In the remaining clustered data, we can
say that, Greenland can afford to deploy a more risk-taking strategy for forecasting exports when compared to
Nepal.
2. Between 2000-2016, for Capital goods, consumer goods, chemicals, food and miscellaneous goods, USA has
imported 1.6 times than what they exported. In this period, USA would have tried to increase their foreign
currency reserves as goods of USA would have been lesser competitive than the imported goods.
 Group 6: Effects of the 2008 Crisis on Select Countries

ABSTRACT:
Among the top eight countries in the world trade, the balance of trade of Canada turned surplus to marginal
deficit whereas Italy posted surplus. The financial market crisis has not affected the balance of trade of Canada,
France, Italy and UK.
INTRODUCTION:
Call it the Subprime Crisis or the Mortgage Crisis or the Crisis of Credit, the 2008 meltdown needs little to no
introduction at all lead to tens of trillions of dollars being wiped out from the global economy. Our analysis is
to study the impact of this crisis on global trade.
Based on the data available from WITS, countries were sorted based on the average imports and exports for the
years preceding and succeeding 2008. The top 8 countries were taken into consideration with an addition of
India and China being taken into consideration.
FINDINGS:
Since our study pertains to the 2008 crisis, the data has been restricted to the years of 2005 through 2012 and
the corresponding average of trade receipts and expenditure has been taken into consideration.
To analyze which countries fall into the scope of study a simple descending sort was run on the Mean Trade
receipts of Exports and Imports for the necessary years.
We saw the trend in the Import and Export for the countries over the years from which we calculated the
Balance of Trade(BOT=Exports - Imports) for the countries.

Chart 1 – Depicting BOT for the countries from 2005-2012 Chart 2 – Depicting Import & Export pattern from 2005-2012

On studying the trend over the years, we noticed a YoY dip in the imports & exports in 2009.
As expected in the years leading upto the crisis, while there are certain deviations in the actual amounts all the
countries who had previously registered a deficit continued to do so and the ones that had a surplus stayed
inline.
We bucketized the data into 2 bins for the period of pre-crisis (2005-2008) and post-crisis (2009-2012) and
noticed that Canada emerged as the biggest outlier in terms of the Balance of Trade trend as they had gone
from registering a surplus to a deficit.
 Table 1 – Depicting Balance of Trade from 2005-2012
We did descriptive analysis on our data set using measures of centrality and dispersion on the Exports and
Imports for the years 2005 through 2012, looking at the spread of dispersion we see that Canada, France Italy
and United Kingdom were the nations that were least affected around the crisis period in terms of both Imports
and Exports.

Table 2 – Summary Statistics highlighting Dispersion around Imports & Exports

Table 3 – Summary Statistics highlighting Centrality around Imports & Exports

Looking at the overall symmetry of the distribution using the measure of centrality we see that Germany is the
only nation that has maintained a normal distribution(mean = median) for both Import and Export Trade flow
from 2005-2012.
On analyzing the trade receipts since the start of the millennium, we did a further detailed analysis on the trading
patterns of India-China
INFERENCES:
Ø Canada emerged as the biggest outlier in terms of the Balance of Trade trend as they had gone from
registering a surplus (pre-crisis) to a deficit (post-crisis)
Ø Canada,France,Italy and United Kingdom were the nations that were least affected around the crisis
period in terms of both Imports and Exports for the duration 2005-2012.
Ø Germany is the only nation from our Select Country dataset that has maintained a normal distribution
with respect to both Import and Export trade flow
Ø India has been traditionally consumption driven and China being investment driven. This translates into
China being a net exporter and India being a net importer and continuing to be so even post the 2008
crisis.

Please note: The inference is based on our data set containing the top 9 Select nations and India
 Group 7: Descriptive Measures of Top 10 Importing and Exporting Nations

Abstract
For several countries, the mean values of exports and imports are more than median values. It shows rapid
expansion of international trade during the period due to opening up of borders for international trade.
Introduction
This prime objective of this report is to throw light on the descriptive measures of statistics such as
1. Centrality Measures
2. Variability Measures
For this analysis, we have considered the data of top ten exporting and importing nations provided by WITS,
from the year 1988 to 2016.
The top 10 exporting nations of the world includes China, US, Germany, Japan, France, UK, Canada,
Netherland, India, Hong Kong in the order of the average Import indicator ($).
The top 10 importing nations of the world includes US, China, Germany, UK, France, Japan, Netherland, Hong
kong, Italy, Canada, in the order of the average Export indicator ($).

1. Centrality Measures
A. Inferences from Mean & Median – From Table 1 and 2, we can infer that mean and median values
of exports and imports of many countries show significant difference. As mean values are more than
median in most cases, it shows rapid expansion of international trade during the period due to opening
up of borders for international trade.

Table:- 1 Table:- 2
2. Variability Measures
It is also referred to be as the measures of dispersion, this gives us the spread of data from mean.
A. Inferences from Range – Though UK, France and Japan have almost comparable means, it can be
easily inferred from Figure 1, that the operating range of Japan is wider than France, which is wider than
UK.
 Figure:- 1
B. Inferences from Mean Absolute Deviation and Standard Deviation-

Table:- 4 Table:- 5
Table 4 and 5, gives us a clear picture of how this data is spread around the mean, and almost all the data from
our analysis is right skewed, and to further get a view of how standard deviation varies from the mean, in a
normal curve, Figure 2 has been attached and an overall calculation from the table is summarized.

Figure:- 2 – Source Internet

Figure 2, gives us the view of a normal curve and the spread of data. The top 10 importing and exporting nations
that we have considered for our analysis lies much within MEAN±1SD and MEAN±2SD as per the calculations
made in Table 1 & 2, which means that the data is mostly clustered around the mean and forms much narrowed
curve.
Conclusion
The idea behind framing this report is to understand the key concepts of descriptive analysis, the summary
measures does not mean complete analysis of the data, it is to rather understand the data well, like the spread of
the data, the effect of outliers in the data and how it further destabilizes the mean by skewing and many more.
 Group 8: OPEC and ASEAN Nations- Trade Surplus analysis (1988-2016)
Abstract
Export and import data of OPEC countries are volatile and right skewed due to high value of exports in few
years on account of high oil price. This results in large trade surplus for OPEC countries. On the other hand,
ASEAN countries exports are diversified but its balance of trade are surplus in few years and deficit in other
years.
Introduction
• OPEC (The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) is an intergovernmental organization
of 15 nations, founded in 1960 and headquartered since 1965 in Vienna, Austria
• ASEAN (The Association of Southeast Asian Nations) is a regional intergovernmental organization
comprising of ten Southeast Asian countries
Members of both these organizations have completely different trade portfolio. This report will analyse import
and export data for these two sets of countries using following mechanisms
A. Measures of central tendency
B. Visualization
C. Measures of dispersion
A. Measures of central tendency
Ø Findings based on Mean (Unit: US$ bn)
1. Export mean of OPEC is 537 as compared to 598 of ASEAN
2. Import mean of OPEC is 393 as compared to 567 of ASEAN

OPEC ASEAN
Ø Findings based on Median (Unit: US$ bn)
Export Mean 537 598
1. Mean – Median for OPEC = 71
2. Mean – Median for ASEAN = -12 Import Mean 393 567
Trade surplus
(US$ bn) 4163 927
Conclusion
Although in absolute terms ASEAN exports more, trade surplus generated is more for OPEC due to relatively
high imports by ASEAN
Trade surplus = (Export mean – Import mean) * 29 years
 Exports - Imports YoY (US$ bn)
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
-100
88
90
92
94
96
98
00
02
04
06
08
10
12
14
16
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
-200

OPEC ASEAN

Conclusion I
Trend for OPEC is right skewed. This means there are few large values that drive the mean upward.
Conclusion II
Trend for ASEAN is left skewed. This means there are few small values that drive the mean downward.
Both conclusions are can be visualized in the chart on right

B. Visualization
Looking back at Trade surplus chart of OPEC vs ASEAN it is evident that there have been huge spikes in
values for OPEC. Both positive and negative spikes are observed.
The reason for which is fluctuations in oil prices over last 15 years. But how exactly is it related to OPEC
trade surplus chart? How big is the impact of oil prices on OPEC? Let us try to explain by adding oil price
trend on secondary axis of the same chart.

Exports - Imports US$ bn

600 120
100
400
80
200 60
40
0
20
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016

-200 0

Oil prices OPEC ASEAN

Conclusion: Oil price trend and trade surplus for OPEC are almost precisely proportional. Quick fact check
reveals 90% of OPEC exports are oil related.
Impact on ASEAN curve is minimal as their trade portfolio is diversified.
C. Measures of dispersion
Below are the trade surplus box plots for all countries separately for OPEC and ASEAN. 29 years data has
been considered in US$ bn to prepare box plot for each country. The larger the box, the more dispersion in a
set of data.

Conclusion I
OPEC
Only 2 out of 15 countries have significant range as well as dispersion.
Standard deviation of OPEC over 29 years is only 14% away from mean
(SD=163 and Mean=144)

ASEAN
4 out of 10 countries have significant range as well as dispersion. Standard
deviation for ASEAN over 29 years is 42% away from mean (SD=45 and
Mean=32)

Conclusion II
High SD is not necessarily a bad thing. If more deviations are on positive side
of the mean it is actually a good thing considering this scenario (trade surplus).
Look at below table showing for how many years trade surplus was deviating
by how much from mean

OPEC ASEAN
mean + 1sd 5 10
mean - 1sd 19 11
mean + 2sd 2 5
mean - 2sd 1 3
mean + 3sd 2 0
mean - 3sd 0 0

For OPEC 20/29 years were below mean whereas for ASEAN 14/29 years
were below mean. This means
- overdependency on few countries for OPEC
- overall positive outlook for ASEAN

Inference
Although trade surplus for OPEC is 4000 bn$, overall trade outlook is subject to risk as reasoned in analysis
based on dispersion measures.
Recommendation is for OPEC countries to use surplus in building alternate industries to diversify and de-risk
their trade portfolio. Need for diversification comes out of the fact that OIL price, which is their 90% of
exports is highly subject to geo-political situation.
 Group 9: International Trade Summary (1988-2016)
Abstract
China and US dominates world trade as exporter and importer respectively. The trade surplus of China is
almost mirror image of US imports. Introduction
Data Overview:
The raw dataset consists of both import and export values for 29 years i.e. from 1988 to 2016. Analysis is made
for each categories i.e. World as a single entity, 7 regions, 257 countries.
No data cleaning is required for World and region level analysis as it has data for all 29 years.
However, country level data has missing export and import values for some years. To produce unbiased result,
few countries were discarded from dataset based on the below considerations:

Data Cleaning:
1. World Import Dataset:
If we consider countries with approximately 10% (as we have smaller dataset, the missing % is slightly
increased to leverage maximum information) missing value for 29 years, then we need to consider 29*0.1 = 2.9
i.e. approx. 3 years of missing data at max which means they should have minimum 26 years of data.
However, there are 23 countries having 25 years of data. So we adjusted the missing rate little higher (approx.
13%) to include a good amount of countries in our analysis. Hence now we will have countries with
29*0.13=3.77 i.e. approx. 4 years of missing data at max which means they should have minimum 25 years of
data.
2. World Export Dataset:
Due to similar nature of data, the same analysis applied here as well where we considered countries having
missing percentage as approx. 13% i.e. 4 years of missing data at max.
After data cleaning, we found total 217 countries to consider for further analysis for both import and export
data.
Key Findings (Based on measure of centrality & dispersion)
World Export-Import Trend

World Export-Import Over Years

25
20
In Trillion

15
10
5
0
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016

Export Import
• Both import and export are left skewed.
• The trend line indicates that both import and
export values for World are nearly equal
from 1988 to 1999. But from 2000 export is
significantly higher than import.
• Both import and exports are affected with a
downward trend during global recession of
2008.
• The upward trend over year’s breaks at 2014,
after which it follows downward trend.
Top Partners over Years
Top 10 Partner Share to World Export Over
Years(%)
• United States is the largest importer based on
average trade over 29 years i.e. from 1988 to
2016.
• Here European countries are playing the
major role as importers.
Dispersion Measure of Top 10 Countries (In Trillions of Dollar)
Exporter
• Based on average trade over last 29 years, 3
major regional partner for “World export and
import” are
1. Europe & Central Asia
2. East Asia & Pacific
3. North America
Top 10 Partner Share to World Import Over
Years(%)
• China is largest exporter based on average
trade over 29 years i.e. from 1988 to 2016.
• Here both European and Asian countries are
playing the major role as exporters.
Importer
 • “Box and whisker plot” clearly shows China has • “Box and whisker plot” shows United States
highest dispersion out of top 10 exporters over has highest dispersion out of top 10 importers
last 29 years. Sigma value : 0.88 over last 29 years. Sigma value : 0.79

Interesting Outcomes for US (Being a top Exporter and Importer)

Trade Deficit/Surplus of China & United State United State Export to World Vs Dollar Index
1.5 1.8
1.6
1.0
1.4
1.2
0.5
1.0
0.0 0.8
0.6
-0.5 0.4
0.2
-1.0
0.0

1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
-1.5

China United States United States(Export) Dollar Index

• Even if United States is 2nd largest exporter, it is • From above graph, it is clear that from 1996
always falling for trade deficit unlike China. mid-year to 2016, “US Export” trend is
inversely proportional to “Dollar Index”.
• Dollar Index data link referred from here.

Group 10: The Economic Crisis & India’s Export Trend.

Abstract

India’s export and import are in line with other countries. Till 2008, India’s international trade expanded rapidly
but post financial market crisis, it shows a declining trend. Like many countries, the recovery of international
trade in 2009 was temporary.
Group 10: The Economic Crisis & India’s Export Trend.

Abstract

India’s export and import are in line with other countries. Till 2008, India’s international trade expanded rapidly
but post financial market crisis, it shows a declining trend. Like many countries, the recovery of international
trade in 2009 was temporary.
 Group 10: The Economic Crisis & India’s Export Trend.

Abstract

India’s export and import are in line with other countries. Till 2008, India’s international trade expanded rapidly
but post financial market crisis, it shows a declining trend. Like many countries, the recovery of international
trade in 2009 was temporary.

Introduction
The International Monetary Fund has expressed optimism that India’s GDP is set to grow 7.5% next year (FY19)
against 6.9% this year. But, before being considered as one of the world’s largest growing economies, India
along with the rest of the world had to go through an Economic Crisis.

India Vs The World

The Economic crisis of 2008 emerged due to the failure of several large US based financial firms. It spread
across the globe due to the involvement of other firms and Governments, resulting in declining stock market
prices across the world. India however, was less affected by this economic turndown as it relied more on
internal consumption than import substitutions.

World India EXPORTS - India & the World

(Growth Rates Y2Y, %)
50%
Between 2008 and 2009, India’s financial fall
42% 44%
40%
37% stood at 16% as compared to the World i.e. 21%.
30% 31% 32% Since then the both the markets have not been able
26% 27%
20% 21% 23% 22% 20% to recover, though there is an improvement in
17% 16% 15% 15%
10%
13% 12% Indian Exports from the year 2015. The decline in
6% 6% 3%
0% Indian Exports could be accounted due to lower
0%
-3% 0%
-1%
-4% -5% -9% demand in exports, and India’s dependency on
-10%
-16% -13%
-15% low price commodities.
-20% -21% -19%
-30%
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

For the period between 2001-07, the export values are more dispersed and away from the mean as compared
to years from 2008. Prior to the financial crisis, from year 2001 to 2007, the export values were more dispersed
from the mean, however post the crisis the export were more stabilized. It is important to note that although the
deviation is very close to mean when compared for 08-09, the graph clearly shows a significant movement. In
conclusion, the overall world trend is in sync with the export trends of India.
2008 impact on export and import

The below graph shows that the Indian exports vs imports

Details 2001- 07 2008- 09 2010- 16

Standard World 0.16 0.02 0.04
Deviation India 0.21 0.03 0.04
Mean World 2,103.56 15,688.50 1,963.14
India 1,923.89 179.50 31.10

INDIA EXPORTS INDIA IMPORTS

600

400
Billion USD

200

0
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Indian exports surpass its imports. We have used centrality Measures to understand the Indian Exports vs Indian
Imports. The export mean is $273B, whereas Import mean is $184B. The exports are left-skewed which
translates that the mean is pushed lower by a few small values. The imports are right-skewed which says that
there are a few high values pulling the mean higher.
The following graph shows the region wise exports for the Details Exports Imports
periods 2001-07, 2008-09 and 2010-16. It indicates the recovery Mean 273 184
rates based on the post 2008 shares of partners, where in the Median 291 179
export to Middle East, Africa and Latin America have captured Mean –Median -18 5
better shares than pre-2008 period. Skew -0.0818 0.0294
69
60 57
60
46 42
39 39
40 2001 - 2007
21 21 22 21
20 14 15 11 16 13 2008 - 2009
5 5 9 6
2 2010 - 2016
0
East Asia & Middle East & Europe & North America Sub-Saharan South Asia Latin America
Pacific North Africa Central Asia Africa & Caribbean
Impact on products export share

Consumer goods

2010-16 Intermediate goods

129 89 49 44 35 35 31 26 22 104
Fuels
Stone and Glass

2008-09 77 58 28 28 22 22 18 17 16 67 Textiles and Clothing

Capital goods
Chemicals

2001-07 36 31 9 14 15 8 9 9 8 30 Raw materials

Metals
Others
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Before the 2008 economic crisis, Indian Export market was dominated by Consumer Goods followed by
Intermediate goods. In Post-recession period, Consumer goods acquire a growth of 2% from Pre-2008, showing
the growth of finished products due to low labor and raw material prices. However, the intermediate goods have
declined. The same scenario can be referred to Textiles and clothing whose proportion has shrunk over the
years. This might be due to competition given by the industrial growth in China and other South Asian countries.
Another reason responsible for the decline of export Intermediate and Textile goods are the Free Trade
Agreements (FTAs) between Europe, UK and US markets. Unlike its other Asian counterparts Vietnam,
Bangladesh and Cambodia, India has not been able to capitalize this favorable opportunity.
Group 11: Globalization and Its Impact on Export Import Trade on India Vs the Big Four
Abstract:

The largest exporter of the world till 2004 was the USA but it lost its tag in 2005 to China. Since then China
consolidated its position and increased its export by 2.5 times in the next 12 years. The highly skewed balance
of trade is not sustainable and creates tension between the countries.

Introduction:
Based on our basic statistical analysis using the central tendencies, below mentioned are the key findings:
Export trend over 24 years (in Mil. USD)

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

China Germany India Japan United States

 Import Trend Over 24 Years (in Mil. USD)

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

China Germany India Japan United States

1. Indian export business started only after liberalization in 1991 and has seen a gradual increase YOY, it
was mid of 90’s where in India realized the potential of global trade reforms and a good amount of hard cash
seeped into Indian economy, via. dot com boom, dot com bubble, fibre network, etc.; same is visible from the
graphical representation.
2. It was a perception as of 1998 that Japan was resource poor and used exports to pay for its raw material.
However, Japanese tradition has been to be self-sufficient since ages and It was only post World War II, that
world realized the need to study different cultures and different markets. It was late 19th century and early
20th century when the International Monetary Fund (IMF) identified four basic aspects of globalization: (1.)
Trade (2.) Transaction (3.) Capital (4.) Migration and dissemination of knowledge. Hence, to establish the
same Multinational trade contracts and agreements got signed, like the General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade (GATT), North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the European Union (EU) has been hugely
involved in eliminating tariffs between member states, and the World Trade Organization. As a result, China
took an advantage of Global trade reforms and became the largest importer and exporter in the world followed
by USA, UK and Japan. (Ref. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalisation_in_India)
 3. In the present scenario China, USA, Germany & Japan are the BIG 4 in terms of exports and imports,
worldwide.
4. It is also evident that the major shuffle in the positions of the BIG 4, has taken place only in 2001-2005.

5. Till 2001 USA and Germany used to be the largest exporters in the world
6. In 2002, China was the third largest exporter after the UK and US.
7. China went very strong by 2004 and became the largest exporter and importer.
8. Despite reducing import restrictions several times in the 2000s, India was evaluated by the World Trade
Organisation in 2008 as more restrictive than similar developing economies, such as Brazil, China, and Russia.
The WTO also identified electricity shortages and inadequate transportation infrastructure as significant
constraints on trade. (Ref. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalisation_in_India)
9.The highlights by WTO on shortage of electricity and inadequate infrastructure, etc. were taken seriously and
multiple key initiatives were taken by the Indian government which were initiated between 2001-2010, such as,
SEZ Act,2005; NREGA Act, 2006; RTI Act,2005; Modernization of International Airports, Roads and Ports for
transportation. Ever Since then we see India slowly but gradually making significant contribution to the Global
Export and import trade.
 Group 12: Analysis of economic growth of India with its neighboring countries”
Abstract
China is traditionally trade surplus country and it exploited the trade liberalization in the year 2000. India
could not follow and exploit the opportunity due to lack of infrastructure development and high oil and gold
imports.
Introduction: -
Liberalization:- we got economic liberalization in India in 1991,with goal of making the economy more
market and service oriented and expanding the role of private and foreign investment.
2008 economic crisis:-global financial crisis was caused due to subprime lending, easy credit conditions,
growth of housing bubble and many other reasons.
We analyse the import and export data of India with neighbouring countries.
Mean value:
Import mean of China is 618 as compared to India of 141 i.e. 3 times. Export mean of China is 960 as
compared to India of 108 i.e. 7.8 times.
Trade Balance Conclusion:-Trade Balance refers to difference
between import and export.If import are higher then
1000
there will be fall in domestic sector and employment.
500 On the other hand for financial imports, a country will
rely on export that will get the revenue desired. On
0 comparison of mean value for China and India, we see
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016

that mean of imports in China have risen by 3 times

-500 when compared to India, which has in turn helped
China India China to boost its export by factor of 7.8

Fig.1. Trade balance of India and China

Dispersion
Range of China exports is 2522 and imports is 1737 with standard deviation of 900 on exports and 614 for
imports. ( Mean =959 on export, Mean=618 on import). Range of India exports is 281 and imports is 402
with standard deviation of 100 on exports and 144 for imports.
Both China and India have significant range as well as dispersion on both imports and exports.
(Mean=108 on export, Mean=141 on import).

Exports Mean & SD Imports: Mean & SD

2000 1500
960
US Bil $

US Bil $

1000 618
1000
108 500 141
0 0
China India China India
Countries Countries
 Fig.2.Comparison of imports and exports of India and China
Conclusion
The global recession of 2008 affected China by its exports as there was a steady decline in purchases globally
and it tightened the exports. Exports declined by 14.7% in the year 2009. There was a gradual increase in
exports after the year 2009. Exports to China grew almost twice than compared to its import.
Visual charts
50 50
40 40
30 Pakistan 30 Pakistan
20 Bangladesh 20 Bangladesh
10 Sri Lanka 10 Sri Lanka
0 0

1988
1991
1994
1997
2000
2003
2006
2009
2012
2015
1988
1991
1994
1997
2000
2003
2006
2009
2012
2015

Fig.3.Comparison of imports and exports of neighbours Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka
Concerning the exports table above, Bangladesh is leading with the support of textiles exports, and
approximately 70% of its revenue comes from these exports. Post-2015, Bangladesh is leading in textile
export in this region. In addition to this, due to the drastic increase in fuel and food prices, imports of these
countries have grown significantly post 2002.
Inference
China’s overly dependent export market is prone to fluctuations according to the world trade scenario which
can be easily observed post-2012. China still sustains a trade account surplus while all the other nations seem
to have a trade deficit mainly due to dependency on fluctuating oil and gold prices India’s vision in the world
trade is not only earning foreign exchange but also to induce the economic growth and development by
increasing its exports. The 2008 global economic crisis has hindered its effort. There was afewer variations
in Indian import and export statistics mainly due to fact that our economy is driven by the consumption of
population. India saw a higher deficit in between 2008 to 2012 when import costs increased by 47% due to
lack of natural resources like oil and gold. Recommendation is for India to explore alternate fuel resource
and diversify trade-portfolio.
 Group 13: Study on Current Account Balance of G7 countries (1988-2016)
Abstract:
G7 countries have moved from trade surplus countries to trade deficit countries during the last two decades
and mainly caused by USA. The other six G7 countries try to balance their international trade with their
export nearing imports.
Introduction:
The G7 (the group of seven) is a group consisting of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, United Kingdom
and United States. (1)They are the seven largest advanced economies in the world, representing 62% of the
global net wealth as of 2017. (2)The G7 countries also represent more than 46% of the global GDP based on
nominal values, and more than 32% of the global GDP based on purchasing power parity. The current
account analysis which depicts whether a country is a trade surplus or deficit is calculated based on the
import and export data.
Analysis:
1.0 Import & Export Trade Value:

Fig.1.1 Export & Import Values Fig.1.2 G7 Countries - Total Import vs Export
8000 7.000
6271
6000 1699 5.000

4000 837 747 3.000

796 2406 521
468 1967
2000 1331 1.000
529 689 513 508
0 -1.000
88
90
92
94
96
98
00
02
04
06
08
10
12
14
16
Canada France Germany Italy Japan UK USA
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
Export Import Total Export Total Import

*The values indicated are mean values in B USD *the values indicated are for the period 1988-2016 in T
USD
According to Fig.1.1, during the period 1988-2016, United States is the highest importer valued at 6271B
USD & Canada is the least of the G7 group at 468B USD. The G7 countries as a group of powerful
economies import (107.24T USD) more than they export (96.80T USD). Fig.1.2 shows the total import and
export values of G7 as a group during the same period and it can be inferred that
Description 1988 - 1990 1991-1999 2000-2008 2009-2016
G7 As a Group Trade Deficit Trade Surplus Trade Deficit Trade Deficit
Mean (Export) 529 2039 3854 5272
Mean (Import) 571 1936 4433 6026
France, United Kingdom & United States played a decisional impact to categorize the G7 as a group as
trade deficit during the corresponding period. There is a positive correlation (0.91) between the export and
import of the G7 as a group over the period 1988–2016. When the export increases, the import also
increases and likewise.
2.0 Effect of 2008 Market recession on Imports & Exports of G7 Countries:
Fig.2.1 & 2.2 shows the import & export trend of G7 countries for the year 2003 to 2013 and it can be
observed that the countries had a stable positive growth from 2003 till 2008 market recession, where all the
countries faced a dip in 2009. Even though the countries import value started to increase after 2009, it can
be seen that the growth after 2011 was not stable, but was fluctuating and stagnant across the seven
countries.

Fig.2.1 - Import Trend Fig.2.2 - Export Trend

7000 United States

6000
United Kingdom
5000
Japan
4000
Italy
3000
2000 Germany

1000 France

0 Canada
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

*the values indicated are for the period 2003-2013 in B USD

3.0 Current Account Balance of G7 Countries:

Fig.3.1 Current Account Balance - G7 Countries

Mean Mean 0.00

Countries Mean CA SD of CA
Export Import
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
Canada 281 268 13 21 -0.20
-0.35 -0.41
France 357 388 -31 36
-0.48 -0.47
Germany 739 605 134 99 -0.40
-0.56 -0.58
Italy 289 280 9 27 -0.36 -0.91
Japan 530 386 144 54 -0.60 -0.70 -0.72 -0.70 -0.84
-0.77 -0.78 -0.93
United Kingdom 289 389 -100 76 -0.83
-0.86
United States 853 1382 -528 383 -0.80
*Values are for the period 1988-2016 in B USD
CA- Current Account High -1.00
SD - Standard Deviation Table 3.1 Low

*the values indicated are values of current account for the period 2000-2016 in T USD
It can be inferred from Table 3.1; Japan & United States are the highest trade surplus and trade deficit nation.
Canada even though is the lowest in export and import is consistent throughout the period. Out of seven
countries, more than 50% are trade surplus. It can be observed from Fig.3.1 -
Description 2000 - 2005 2006 - 2014 2015-2016
G7 As a Group Declining Volatile Increasing
Conclusion:
Over the recent period (2007-2016); United States has shown 1.07% CAGR, while all the other countries of
the G7 group has a negative CAGR. Even though all the other countries show a positive trend over the period
(1988-2016), the recent values give an entrepreneurial decision to an investor seeking to invest in the
country. It can also be concluded that for the G7 Countries as a group, United Kingdom, United States &
France are the major contributors in bringing down the group as trade deficit even though it consists of most
advanced economies.
 Group 14: Global Trade Watch (2001-2016) - A perspective on Global Economics

Abstract
There is a remarkable shift in the international trade from developed economies to emerging economies.
The share of Asian countries in the international trade, both export and import significantly increased in 21st
Century

Introduction
Historically, international trade showed a remarkable growth over the course of 19th century and marked
the start of ‘First wave of globalization’ with technological advances considered to be the triggering factor.
However, the interwar period (World War I) saw the reversal of this wave; the rise of nationalism and the
decline of liberalism led to a plunge in international trade. This global downfall started to recover post World
War II with commencement of ‘Second wave of globalization’, which marked a significant rise of
international trade like never before.

Observations and relative analysis

2001-2008 analysis:
The ongoing historical wave of globalization picked up pace post year 2000, as presented in the below
visualization; it followed an exponential increase in import-export between 2001-2008 with more than 200%
trade surge in Asian and African continents and nearing 200% in Europe, Oceania, and South America. The
economists attributed this growth to technological advances, reduced transaction and communications costs,
preferential trade agreements and trade liberalization, increased intra-industry trade (type of goods), growth
of bilateral exchanges, and South-South trade (trade between emerging economies).
 Fig1: Export Analysis of 6 Continents

Fig 2: Import Analysis of 6 Continents

Import Export
Continents
2001- 2008- 2009- 2014- 2001- 2008- 2009- 2014-
2008 2009 2014 2016 2008 2009 2014 2016
Period
Africa 227% 13% 53% 47% 283% 32% 52% 41%
Asia 218% 18% 68% 33% 214% 22% 62% 24%
Europe 156% 24% 29% 22% 144% 23% 35% 18%
North America 81% 23% 52% 23% 75% 22% 52% 16%
Oceania 189% 17% 46% 32% 181% 18% 59% 26%
South America 193% 24% 69% 43% 236% 26% 46% 28%
Table 1. Import and export surge and decline during the given periods.

The great recession of 2008: As depicted in the visualization, the growing global international trade saw a
rough patch during the ‘Great recession’ where the graph sank to trough between 2008-2009. As per the data
from https://wits.worldbank.org/, global import-export declined at an average rate of 20-23% in the span of
1 year. Economists corresponded this fall to rising import restrictions, slow trade negotiations, shrinking
demand, surge in trade disputes, and rising unemployment apart of many other economic setbacks.

2009-2014 analysis: As the global economy started to recover post 2009, international trade rebounded back
at an average growth of 52% with Asia highest at 68% (import) and 62% (export) from 2009-2014. As the
above visualization depicts, this recovery phase in international trade showed a fair stability in the Asian
continent and slight fluctuation in Europe.
2014-2016 analysis: The outputs from the World bank data show that, recent few years after 2014 witnessed
a plunge in the global trade at an average decline of 25% in export (Africa highest at 41%) and 33% in
import (Africa highest at 47%) from 2014-2016. The report of the World Bank, suggests emerging
economies to be the epicentre of this downfall. The import decline in Asia, which account for more than
quarter of world trade attributed to 94% decline in world import volumes. Economists believe multiple
factors like persistent weak global demand and structural changes in world trade, falling commodity prices,
China’s transition to a new growth path, slower pace of trade liberalisation, and maturation of global value
chains to have played a significant role in this downfall.

Conclusion

The trends from this analysis tell us that, international trade growth has an ongoing though fluctuating
dynamics, directly proportional to global economic condition and vice versa. However, one of the essential
observation is the shift of trade epicentre from developed economies to emerging economies. It would be
interesting to see how China and emerging Asian economies, would affect the global economics and
international trade in coming years.
 Group 15: Analysis of International Trade – North America And China
Abstract
While China’s export increased more than 12 times, the export of North America has increased 3 times
during the last three decades. The outcome of this shift is China’s export surpassed the total export of North
America. On imports, China imports half the value of imports of North America. The result is wide trade
gap between the two large economies. If this imbalanced international trade continues for longer time, it
may cause economic tension among the countries
BRIEF INSIGHT
Economic progress is best depicted from the analyses of world trade data which this report has tried to focus
upon. To be specific, the report mainly focuses on the performance of few countries of North America as
well as China on the world trade during the period of 1988 – 2016 where noticeable change has occurred
despite slight fluctuations while great recession after 2007.
Findings based on Mean
Key observations:
1. The Chinese markets observed net gain on the trade during the observed periods which kept on increasing
each subsequent period whereas the North American market observed a net loss on the trade which kept on
increasing during the same periods.
2. Chinese market on products had a net trade surplus of $341B whereas the North American markets witnessed
a net trade deficit of $500B on an average during 1988 to 2016.

Mean Import and Export values (in $ bn) for years

1988 - 2000 2001 - 2008 2009 - 2016

Countries
Export Import Export Import Export Import

China 175.15 100.47 1,010.53 595.89 2,181.65 1,481.43

North
America 728.34 841.35 1,573.56 2,334.48 2,259.87 3,129.92

Findings based on Standard Deviation

Key Observations:
1. Chinese’s standard deviations of imports are quite varying and has increased drastically in the
aforementioned intervals of time. This implies that the dispersion of data is high and there is a large
variation from the mean. This can primarily be attributed due to the growing economy and consumption
 of the nation. Whereas their standard deviation on exports first increased at 300% and later reduced by
5%.
2. North America’s standard deviation of imports have been declining, stating that the average expenditure
on products year on year is around the same value whereas the revenue through exports of products
increased during the second period and later decreased. This clearly indicates that the demand for the
Chinese and North American products has stabilized.

Standard Deviation (in $ bn) for years

1988 - 2000 2001 - 2008 2009 - 2016

Countries
Export Import Export Import Export Import

China 124.68 68.22 1,010.53 263.48 2,181.65 250.09

North America 373.60 454.16 335.28 495.46 268.05 400.51

The below two graphs provide us some insight on the volume of import and export trade done in Billions of
US$ of the two major regions i.e North America and China

Analysis:Pre-2000 decade
✓ North America was one of the major importers of products into their continent and comprises of nearly
30% on an average.
✓ China’s imports were quiet low during this decade as the country was still not industrialized as the western
peers.
✓ North America made up bulk of the export percentage to the rest of the world and this is probably due to
the reason that it is an industrialized economy.
✓ China’s exports were slowly gaining momentum as it has just kicked off a major industrial revolution.
2001 - 2008

✓ North America was one of the major importers of products into their continent and comprises of nearly
25% , however the continent slowly lost its steam when it reached 2008 probably due to some financial
problems faced.
✓ China’s imports were low during the beginning of the decade as the country was still not industrialized
completely as the western peers however imports increased to match up with its export oriented economy.
✓ North America was a major exporter and had a share of nearly 33% before year 2000 when compared to
the rest of the world, however it had lost momentum by the end of 2008 due to financial problems and
instability in the economy.

2009 – 2016
✓ North American imports begin to stabilize when compared to the rest of world as the world as a whole is
undergoing rapid globalization. As Asia gains prominence, the volume of exports or imports increased
and hence the role of North America as leading trader takes less significance
✓ China’s imports reached a peak by 2014 due to increased demand , however it seems to have reduced by
2016 probably due to increasing efficiency and increased internal consumptions in china.
✓ North America’s exports slowly picked up momentum due to improved financial structure during this
period.
✓ China’s exports kept up the same growth rate when compared to the rest of the world crossing the 10%
barrier.

Interpretation/Conclusion:-

There was a monopoly in the Import market of International Trade, which is the United States and the countries
who were importing goods from them was mostly Germany, China, Korea Rep.
But when the Industrial Revolution began in the early 2000’s, there is a rise in the Imports trade among the
countries of China and India etc. China has continued to show good performance in the export area.

Overall the total value of export and import reduced in the years 2014 to 2016 probably due to few protectionist
policies to support Local consumption of raw material.
 Group 16: Top Global Traders Vs. Oil Export Giants

Abstract
Apart from China, Germany, Japan, Russia and Saudi Arabia have been in a constant trade surplus over the
years. With China’s aggressive international trade practices, it is difficult to predict how long these trade
surplus countries will retain their trade surplus status.
Introduction:
This analysis begins by reviewing and cleaning the import and export receipts data from the World Bank
website. After conducting this process, we analyze trade receipts for a total of 206 countries with data for the
years ranging from 1992 to 2016.1 The sum of each individual country’s export and import receipts over the
twenty-five year period were found and compared in both datasets to find the top 6 exporters and importers:
Tier I: United States, China, Germany; Tier II: Japan, France, United Kingdom
These top 6 countries are further examined for our first analysis on trade growth. Following this, export and
import data for these 6 countries and Russia and Saudi Arabia, which are the top two global giants for oil
export2, were merged to find patterns in their balance of trade over the years.

Analysis I:

Exports (US$ Billion) Imports (US$ Billion)

Mean Median St Mean Median St Dev
Dev
China 1107 846 864 714 532 597
USA 957 851 362 1561 1658 696
Germany 844 861 399 691 674 307
Japan 596 626 188 436 438 186
France 401 426 148 437 454 183
UK 326 329 108 439 455 176
Table 1: Trade Summary Statistics for the top 6 Global Traders between 1992-2016. All figure are rounded
off.

1
Data ranging from 1988 and 1991 has been eliminated in order to include The Russian Federation in our research.
2
OEC: The Observatory of Economic Complexity: https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/
 Growth in Mean Export Growth in Mean Import
China 6.21 6.97
USA 2.02 2.45
Germany 2.64 2.45
Japan 1.84 2.29
France 2.07 2.32
UK 1.85 2.21
Table 2: Growth in Mean Export and Import between two time periods: 1992-2004 and 2004-2016
Observations:
v Table 1 shows that the Standard Deviation for China’s exports and imports trade receipts, and USA’s import
receipts, is much higher than that of other countries considered.
v Table 1 further indicates that the mean of China’s exports exceeds the median by over 30%. The mean of
its imports exceeds the median by 34%. This is a lot higher than the difference between the means and
medians of the other countries.
v Table 2 summarizes the growth in the mean export and imports between two time periods: before and after
the median year 2004. The mean of China’s export and import receipts increased by over 6 times between
the two time periods, while that of the other countries grew by less than 2.75 times.
Inferences:
à The data for China’s trade receipts and USA’s imports is less centered and has more variation than that
of the other countries.
à China’s trade data is more skewed than of any of the other top global traders, as can be seen in Graphs
1 & 2 below.
à The extraordinarily high growth of China’s mean trade receipts before and after 2004 explains the skew
in the data and might be one of the contributing factors to the high standard deviation of China’s trade data.
However, this doesn’t throw much light on the variation in USA’s import data, which might be caused due
to other external factors, such as volatility caused by the financial crisis in 2008.

Analysis II:
 Mean Median St Dev. Balance of Trade: 1992-2016

China 394 313 281 Trade Surplus

Germany 153 187 94 Trade Surplus
Japan 160 168 37 Trade Surplus
Russia 39 37 26 Trade Surplus
Saudi 70 37 64 Trade Surplus, except in 2015
USA
Arabia -604 -664 359 Trade Deficit
UK -114 -120 73 Trade Deficit
France -36 -28 37 Both; Predominantly Trade Deficit
Table 3: Summary Statistics of the Balance of Trade of the 8 countries between the time period 1992 and
2016.
Observations:
v China, Germany, Japan, and Russia have been in a constant trade surplus over the years. Saudi Arabia briefly
fell into a trade deficit of 9.89 billion US$ in 2015. On the contrary, USA and UK have stayed in constant
trade deficit. These can be seen in Graphs 3 and 4 below.
v The trade surplus means of China and Saudi Arabia are significantly higher than their medians. Similarly,
the trade deficit mean of USA is a lot lower than its median.
v The standard deviation of China is strikingly larger than that of other countries with a trade surplus

Inferences:
à The sudden drop in oil prices in 2015 could have potentially caused Saudi Arabia’s trade deficit in the
same year. However, this did not impact Russia’s trade surplus, although its value of exports fell by over
30% in 2015, more than in any other year. The impact of the fall in oil prices might have been more diluted
in the case of Russia because of its large volumes of trade items, apart from oil. Although these are the top
2 exporters of oil, oil makes up for 90% of Saudi Arabia’s exports, and less than 50% of Russia’s exports3.
à Means of trade surplus considerably exceeding the medians in case of China and Saudi Arabia can
highlight the visible skew in their data.
à On examining the balance of payments for countries with a trade surplus in graph 3, it can be inferred that
China’s standard deviation could potentially be due to its faster growing surplus.
 Group 17: G7 and BRICS Nations - Balance of Trade Analysis – 2007 to 2016

Abstract
The G7 countries as a group exports more than the exports of BRICS countries but the scale of import of G7
countries are much larger than the imports of BIRCS. This results is large trade deficit for G7 countries and
trade surplus for BRICS. Among BRICS countries, only China shows trade surplus overshadowing all other
countries in the group.

Introduction

G7 Nations: The Group of Seven (G7) is a group consisting of the seven largest advanced economies --
Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States, formed in 1997.4

BRICS: BRICS is association of five major emerging national economies: Brazil, Russia, India, China and
South Africa, founded in June 2006.5 The founding members were Brazil, Russia, India and China. South
Africa joined on December 2010.6

The groups are in different stages of the growth and are represented by different trade portfolios. This report
delves into the export and import data for the two groups using the below statistical techniques.

1. Measures of central tendency

2. Measures of dispersion

1. Measures of central tendency

Conclusion:
G77 BRICS • Due to relatively high imports, G7 group has a
A: Export
Mean 5,594 3,106 trade deficit despite having higher exports as
B: Import compared to BRICS nations.
Mean 6,314 2,955
Trade • The BRICS group has a favorable trade balance
Balance (A- -7200 1510 owing to higher exports over imports.
B)*10

4 https://www.g7germany.de/Content/EN/StatischeSeiten/G7_elmau_en/texte_en/2014-11-05-geschichte-g8.html
5 http://infobrics.org/page/history-of-brics
6
The data for South Africa has been considered from 2011 onward as it joined BRICS in December 2010 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/19/south-
africa-joins-bric-club
5 The data for G7 countries in our study includes Russian Federation till 2013, as Russia was ejected in March 2014
 • Observation based on mean (Unit: US$ billion)
• Observation based on median (Unit: US$ billion)
• Median for G7 countries is -741.38
• Median for BRICS nations is 143.61
While the median trade balance of the G7 countries is dismal for the time period considered, the median
for BRICS nations indicates that the balance of trade for the group, is positive for most of the decade. This
can be attributed to the trade trends of the biggest exporter of the BRICS group –China, whose median is
168.29. As seen in the table below, the graph of China’s trade trends and the balance of trade trend for
BRICS nations are closely related.

Export-Import YoY US$ billion

600
400
200
0
-200 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
-400
-600
-800
-1000

BRICS G7 China

Note - Data for China, includes trade numbers for Hong Kong as well.

2. Measure of Deviation with respect to the Mean

Observation based on measurement of deviation with respect to Mean (Unit: US$ billion)

G78 BRICS
Conclusion:
• BRICS group continue to establish A: Standard 1,400 1,753
efficient trade balance because the Deviation
calculated central tendency of the B: Mean -7,915 1,516
BRICS is on positive side with respect Percentage Cal -17.68% 115.63
to G7. = (A/B)*100
• Higher exports over the imports
continues to be the dominant factor
behind the negative trade balance of
G7.

8 The data for G7 countries in our study includes Russian Federation till 2013, as Russia was ejected in March 2014
Study inference: Though BRICS nations have a trade surplus, it is important to note that the figure is
highly dependent on China’s trade trends. While China’s growth is touted to outpace the other leading
countries, the recommendation for BRICS nations would be to bolster the trade activities and maintain a
trade surplus for other nations as well, in order to maintain the momentum and reduce sole dependency on
China’s trade performance.
 Group 18: World Trade Analysis 1988-2016

Abstract:
This report tries to summarize the key highlights of the world trade statistics mainly focusing on the imports
and exports ranging from 1988 to 2016 with the help of different charts for descriptive analysis. The report
deals majorly on the Trade deficit and Trade surplus trends in the major economies of the world.

Introduction:
● We have started off by comparing the imports and exports on a global level and then the focus and key
findings shifted mainly on the top 10 players of the world using following measures-
■ Mean
■ Standard Deviation
■ Range
● The main objective is to analyze the important trends in the global trade and how economic crisis affected
the trade between countries.

Key Findings:
● Overall Trend in Exports and Imports:
-There has been a great fall for the year 2008-09 due to
financial crisis and world’s import has been highly
affected.
-The graph is right skewed which means the imports
and exports have changed drastically over the years
and also the mean is driven by the values for the recent
years.
-Crude oil crisis’ impact can be seen for year 2014-
2016.
-The international trade summation over the years,
indicate higher import than the exports.
Figure: 1
-The years 2008/09/10 and 2015/16 prove to be
significant indicators for a sudden fall in the global
export/ import trend.

1. Year 2008/09/10 Trend:

This indicates a year of great depression in the

global economy. All the major export countries
from
Europe as well United States and China suffer a
very high decline in the exports. However, China in
the year 2010 managed to regain its export
Figure: 2
surplus.
 2. Year 20015/16 Trend:

Figure: 3

World’s biggest players:

This indicates a sudden dip in the imports of the

major importing countries.
These two years also mark a significant decrease
in the crude oil prices. Thus, we can see a direct
impact on the global import statistics

Figure: 4 Figure: 5

Trade distribution for Top Importers: Trade distribution for Top Exporters:

Country Mean Median Country Mean Median

United States 1381 1360 China 959 504
Germany 605 472 United States 853 757
China 618 293
Germany 739 589
Table:01 Distribution for top importers (in million $)
Table: 02 Distribution for top exporters (in million $)
 As we can see for Germany there has been lesser variations as compared to other top players. China has been
showing fat distribution and performing better (Refer Table: 02).

If we notice we have quite stable economies from Central Asia and Europe region. United States is having
wider range as importer than exporter due to China and Germany who are capturing the markets. China’s
exports are majorly dominated by its ability to produce goods at a much cheaper rate than the world whereas
Germany’s exports are highly reliant on its automobile industry. That’s why US government is trying to
reduce the imports by placing high taxes on the goods produced outside US. This is in alignment with Donald
Trump’s America First strategy which was one of the major highlights of his campaign. That dream is still
far for US mostly because of its scarce manpower and high basic wages which drive up the production cost.

● Recent Market Trend:

We observed that for few top players it has been
Surplus or Deficit trade in recent year 2015-16.
Trade =Export-Import,
Trade>0 ; Surplus
Trade<0 ; Deficit trade
 Group 19: Effect of recession on contribution to total trade
Abstract
Introduction
While the global trade for the world has increased over 22 times, the percentage growth however, has been
only 20% during the period 2009-2016 with average YoY growth around 14%. In 2009, global trade volumes
plummeted back to the 2006 numbers by 23%. All G20 countries experienced serious reductions in trade.
We understand that during recession, it is normal to expect a sharp rise in import restrictions due to shrinking
demand and employment and a slowdown in trade negotiations.
This crisis started in the U.S. financial sector (the subprime mortgage market) and propagated to the entire
financial system through mortgage-backed securities and highly leveraged debt structures; so, the crisis
infected the global economy through international financial networks.
Impact of recession on developed and developing countries and recovery trend: Those nations with an
advanced and open financial system (such as Europe) got hit directly and most severely by the shock, whereas
those less connected to the international financial system got hit only indirectly through the link of
international trade. We can also relate the dip of 2008 to the fall of GDP of developed countries (US, Canada,
Europe and Japan). Getting hit hard was the first blow; an onerous recovery period was the second for many
areas of the world. An interesting finding is that the advanced or industrialized regions (U.S., Europe etc)
had the slowest pace of recovery. One plausible explanation to that is that it is harder to recover from a severe
financial shock if it triggers a debt crisis (as in Europe).
The recession period marked the slowest growth of the emerging markets/developing countries like China,
India, Korea etc. Europe as a whole did not adopt strict fiscal stimulus programs during the Great Recession.
Hence, the most long-lasting effects from the downturn were suffered by this region, particularly the nations
where fiscal ability was limited due to the government debt crisis. In contrast, the U.S. initiated several fiscal
stimulus packages, but they failed to stimulate job creation and infrastructure buildup because they were
focused on consumer transfer programs instead. Although the U.S. performed better than Europe, the U.S.
was not the best performer. China, on the other hand, not only adopted a serious fiscal stimulus package but
was also successful in spurring job creation, as a result, it recovered the fastest.
Consequently, nations that relied on trade with China, particularly meeting its demand for raw materials to
power China’s industrial engine (such as Africa and Middle East) also saw reasonable recovery.
 Imports for developed countries Imports for developing countries
3,000 1,000
Billions

2,500

Billions
800
2,000
600
1,500
400
1,000
200
500
- -
1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 2013 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 2013
Hong Kong, China India
Indonesia Malaysia
Canada China
Saudi Arabia Spain
Germany Japan
United Kingdom United States Switzerland

Exports for developed countries Exports for developing countries

500
3,000
400
2,500
Billions

2,000 300
Billions

1,500
200
1,000
500 100
-
1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 2013 -
1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 2013
Canada China Hong Kong, China India
Germany Japan Indonesia Malaysia
Saudi Arabia Spain
United Kingdom United States
Switzerland

1. A shift in majority contribution of

total exports and imports is seen from
developed to developing countries.
2. When US, Japan and EU took a hit
during the great recession, the
contribution of Asian/developing
countries increased from 34% to
47%.
3. EU took the biggest hit and China
emerged as a biggest contributor with
5% growth in contribution in Asian
countries followed by India, Saudi
and Korea as well.
 Group 20: International Trade statistics (Greece-Iraq-India)

Abstract:
Iraq and Greece have experience political and economic crisis at different points of time. Though crisis affected
their international trade during around the crisis period, both countries recovered and returned to normal days.
Introduction:
We have chosen Iraq, Greece & India for our analysis. There are different aspects that effect the international
trade.
• In 2003 Iraq was completely devastated by war.
• Greece was largely affected by debt crisis during 2007-08 followed by world economic crisis which
effected the entire global economy.
• Indian market experienced effects of the economy crisis.
Export Data
• The line chart reflects the downfall in export for Iraq, during 2003, because of invasion of Iraq.
• There is downfall in export for all the three countries in 2008-09, during world economic crisis. PFB
statistical summary for export data.

Export Data Staistical

300000000 Summary(Export)
200000000 300000000
200000000
100000000 100000000
0
0
e
n

AD

SD
ng
ea

ia
00
02
04
06
08
10
12
14
16

M
ed
M

Ra
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20

India Iraq Greece India Iraq Greece

Import Data:
There is a decline in import during 2008-09 because of economic crisis, which effected the entire globe.

Import Data Staistical Summary(Import)

600000000 400000000
400000000 200000000
200000000
0
0
E

AD
N

SD
N

NG
IA
EA
00
02
04
06
08
10
12
14
16

M
ED
M

RA
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20

India Iraq Greece India Iraq Greece

Export-Import Comparison:

Export-Import Comparision(2000-2016)
5000000000
4000000000
3000000000
2000000000
1000000000
0
India Iraq Greece

Total Export(2000-2016) Total Import(2000-2016)

• During 2007-08 for Greece, there is sharp increase in import as compared to export which is the major
cause of debt crisis in Greece.
• For India & Greece import is more than export, the difference is a major cause for current account
deficit.
• For Iraq where export is more in comparison to import due to rich oil resources.

India Export Import Iraq Import-Export Greece Import -

500000000 100000000 Export
400000000 80000000 100000000
300000000 60000000 50000000
200000000 40000000 0

2000
2004
2008
2012
2016
100000000 20000000
0 0
Greece(Export) All
2000
2003
2006
2009
2012
2015
00
03
06
09
12
15

Products Import (US$

20
20
20
20
20
20

Thousand)
India(Export) Iraq(Export)
Greece(Import) All
India(Import) Iraq(Import) Products Export (US$

Conclusion:
• We can observe the average export & import followed by how data spread across different country for
particular duration.
• This help us to visualize the range of data set followed by Mean Absolute Deviation & Standard
Deviation.
• This also helps us to visualize the trend of export-import for three countries from 2000-16.
 Group 21: SAARC Nations Trade Analysis -1988-2016

Abstract

India dominates international trade of SAARC countries consisting of eight countries around India. While all
SAARC countries are in trade deficit (import exceeding export), Bangladesh might turn trade surplus if the
current export growth continues. In contrast, with export is and import increasing, Pakistan may witness
economic crisis like the one which India witnessed in 1991.

Introduction
“Formed in 1985, the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) is the regional
intergovernmental organization and geopolitical union of nations in South Asia. The countries included
are Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka.”

Maldives – Impact of the Tsunami of 2004

Nearly 30% of Maldives’ GDP runs on Tourism Receipts, thus Export. After the Tsunami of 2004, tourism in
the country declined considerably due to reduced tourism receipts. Let’s see the impact of the Tsunami on
Maldives’ trade receipts using centrality and dispersion measures.
0.20 Observations:
0.00 • The post-2004 trade deficit averages at more
-0.20 than 6 times of the pre-2004 time frame.
88
90
92
94
96
98
00
02
04
06
08
10
12
14
16
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20

Post
-0.40 Maldives Pre 2004
2004
-0.60
Mean (X-M) -0.15 -0.96
-0.80
Range (X-M) 0.24 0.84
-1.00
Std. Dev. (X-M) 0.09 0.26
-1.20
• The standard deviation almost triples between
-1.40
the 2 periods which indicates higher deviation in
-1.60
trade deficit from the mean in the 2nd time
frame.
Figure 4: Maldives X-M (1988-2016)

Pakistan Vs. Bangladesh – Year on Year Export Growth

8 Observations:
• Pakistan and Bangladesh follow a similar trend
6
in change in YOY Exports.
4 Parameter Bangladesh Pakistan
Mean (YOY
2 1.31 0.67
change in X)
MAD (YOY
0 1.13 1.17
change in X)
1989-'88
1990-'89
1991-'90
1992-'91
1993-'92
1994-'93
1995-'94
1996-'95
1997-'96
1998-'97
1999-'98
2000-'99
2001-'00
2002-'01
2003-'02
2004-'03
2005-'04
2006-'05
2007-'06
2008-'07
2009-'08
2010-'09
2011-'10
2012-'11
2013-'12
2014-'13
2015-'14
2016-'15

-2 • However, Bangladesh has more or less

consistently shown positive YOY change while
-4 that is not the case for Pakistan since 2008.
Bangladesh Pakistan
-6

Figure 5: YOY Export Change – Pakistan and Bangladesh

Inference:
1. The trade deficit over this time period for each country and for SAARC overall is skewed to the right with a
long tail of higher trade deficit for certain years pushing the mean trade deficit up.
2. In Maldives specifically, the Tsunami’s impact was considerable on the trade deficit with continuously
rising deficit in the country. Maldives needs to improve other sectors, apart from Tourism, to contain their
trade deficit due to Natural shocks.
3. Bangladesh is has positive YOY growth in the given period while Pakistan has shown both YOY decline and
higher dispersion (shown in the MAD).
Conclusion:
While the SAARC nations are diverse in their export and import change trends, they are all facing a trade deficit
which they need to work on based on their country-specific issues.
 Group 22: Effect of Global Recession 2008 on Net Exports

Abstract:
While financial markets crisis in 2008 has affected the international trade of several countries, Finland, Hungary
and New Zealand turned trade surplus. The export of Denmark, Peru and Russian Federation have also
increased manifold after financial market crisis though these countries continue to be in trade deficit.

Introduction:

Net exports are the value of a country's total exports minus the value of its total imports. It is a measure used to
calculate a country's expenditures or gross domestic product in an open economy. In other words, net exports
equal the amount by which foreign spending on a home country's goods and services exceeds the home country's
spending on foreign goods and services.
The below graph is for the major economies which reveals the effect of Global recession on their Net Exports
Value.

Net Export Analysis (Bn $)

Pre-recession period Post-recession period
1000
500
0
-500 Sum of Sum of Sum of Sum of Sum of Sum of Sum of Sum of Sum of Sum of Sum of
-1000 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

-1500

China East Asia & Pacific Japan Russian Federation United States India
The quintessential analysis reveals the following facts about the net exports value in the economies mentioned:
1. China and East Asia & Pacific are most affected by 2008 Recession, but China has recovered market again
after 2009.
2. India however follows a stable line for the net exports value during recession. Impact was less due to saving
tendency of Indians.
3. United States shows a continuous import slope for the recession period and thus resulting in negative value
for the net exports.
4. During 2015, 2016 the imports have drastically reduced for the economies mentioned above.
5. Few other countries became net exporter after recession which were counted as net importer before 2008.
Increment in Net Export (Mn $)
Country 2008 2009 % Change
Finland -1234 3841 411.34%
Hungary -2193 5517 351.60%
New Zealand -2658 1001 137.67%

6. A positive effect was observed in following countries:

Increment in Net Export (Mn $)
Country 2008 2009 % Change
Costa Rica 3511 8583 144.43%
Zambia 275 802 191.90%
Russian Federation 10052 60426 501.14%
Peru 347 2674 671.34%
Denmark 682 7144 947.89%

7. Most Affected countries by recession which became Net importer from Net Exporter:

Most Affected Countries by Recession

15000000

10000000

5000000

0
Cameroon

Myanmar

Nauru

Vanuatu

Bolivia

Sub-Saharan

Cocos (Keeling)

Western Sahara

Algeria

Christmas

Turkmenistan

Pitcairn

Cote d'Ivoire

South Africa

Canada

Colombia

Kazakhstan

Latin America &

Iran, Islamic
Island

-5000000
Caribbean
Africa

Rep.
Islands

-10000000

Sum of 2008 Sum of 2009

Conclusion:
The effect of global recession was severe on the developed nations like United States, United Kingdom wherein
the developing countries like Japan, India tried able to manage the severe turmoil due to their high structural
growth rate and quantity and product mix of exports. The recession period proves a great benefit for the
economies of Russian Federation, Hungary wherein the Net Exports value managed to be on a positive scale.
 Group 23: A Study on International Trade Between 1992 - 2016

Abstract
As most of the developing countries of the world initiated economic reforms and liberalization to stimulate their
growth rate and amplify trade potential, China capitalized the opportunity and reached an enviable position in
the international trade. Other developing like India, Qatar and Brazil exhibit a consistent trade growth over the
years.

Introduction
We have tried to study top four developed and developing economies which are spread globally to analyze an
interesting trend between them. These countries have completely different trade portfolios. This report will
analyze import and export data for these countries by putting to use- Measures of Central tendency and
Dispersion.
Developed countries: Germany, France, Japan and United states.
Developing Countries: India, China, Qatar and Brazil.
Avg. Trade Flow- Developed & Developing
Economies
Trade
IMPORT EXPORT Surplus
China 714 1108 394
Findings based on Measures of
Japan 436 596 160 Centrality
Germany 691 844 153 Economy type
Qatar 17 40 23 Trade Flow Developed Developing
Mean
Brazil 122 127 5 Imports 781 254
Mean
France 437 401 (36) Exports 700 350
India 162 125 (38)
United States 1561 957 (604)
Figures in million US $
It is clear from above trend charts that
• The United States has world’s largest trade deficit being 2nd largest exporter after China

• China being second largest importer after United States, its trade surplus narrowed sharply to $394
billion, due to high exports from the country during the same period.

• India has recorded sustained trade deficits since 1992 mainly due to the strong growth in imports.

When we dive deeper to understand the variations in the Imports and Exports (growth and decline) of these
countries over the years compared to its mean (average) trade shown above, we notice that the United States
has increased its Imports very steeply in the 25-year period ended 2016 while China and Germany have shown
exemplary growth in Exports since 1992.

Std. Deviation of Import & Export b/w 1992 & 2016

Developed v/s Developing Economies
United States

India

France

Brazil

Qatar

Germany

Japan

China

0 200 400 600 800 1000

EXPORT IMPORT

Conclusion
Evolving international trade environment has added new dimensions to the global economic scenario. As most
of the developing countries of the world initiated economic reforms and liberalization to stimulate their growth
rate and amplify trade potential, we see a developing country like China catching up with far more developed
countries like The USA and Germany, while countries like India, Qatar and Brazil exhibit a consistent trade
growth over the years of our study.
 Group-24: Sub-Saharan & Mena Under Opec Trade Deficit Analysis & Textile Export
Analysis (1988-2016)
Abstract

Despite being part of The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), the two sub-groups
MENA and Sub-Saharan countries continue to show huge trade deficit
Introduction
• OPEC (The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) is an intergovernmental organization
of 15 nations, founded in 1960 and it’s the oldest surviving intergovernmental organization composed
wholly of developing countries.
• MENA - It’s an acronym for Middle East & North African Region whose primary economy is oil
exports.
• SUB-SAHARAN – A group of African countries which are fully or partially located to the south of
Sahara.
Decadal export and import deficit of the MENA and SUB-SHARAN countries has been analysed, which are
part of OPEC.

Observations
MENA was trade deficit from throughout all the decades whereas Sub-Saharan was initially trade surplus and
through the years it has gone trade deficit. Sub-Saharan markets showed faster growth in the second decade (5
times) compared to MENA countries (4 times), but in the current decade they have both growing at the same
rate.

Visualisations
Inference

The analysis suggests that the trade deficit for the year 2008 seems to have a sudden dip and this is in-align
with the global recession and the sudden drop of crude oil prices which affected the export bill of these oil
dependent economies.
Textile Export Analysis
Introduction

The textile industry in India is pegged at $120 billion and is expected to surpass the $230 billion by 2020
(Source: India Brand Equity Foundation). Similarly, Bangladesh & Vietnam are putting their best effort to
attract more investment & increase export which in turn will lead to competitive textile export battle in coming
years. Being Labor extensive sector & key economic driver for South East Asia, analysis was carried out for
these countries along-with top textile exporters (US, Germany & Japan).
Observation

Below is graphical representation of textile export for all these countries:

Total Textile Export (1988-2016) Textile Export- SD-Mean-Median (1988-2016)

60000000 25000000
40000000 20000000 21054028 20035800
20000000 15000000
0 10000000
11591179
10279854
9006488 9052249
1988
1991
1994
1997
2000
2003
2006
2009
2012
2015

7564708
5000000 6258212
6073790

0
India Total Export
Vietnam Total export SD Mean median
Bangladesh Total Export
India Vietnam Bangladesh

Export Mean-Median & SD (1988-2016) Note-For Bangladesh and Vietnam the

150000000 data is available from year 2000 on-words.
23727264 24488011 There is no data available for Bangladesh
100000000 33484851 34896048
for Year 2014 (that’s why there is a sudden
66353348 68183924
50000000
10813909
14692934 dip in total export for Bangladesh in Year
36255849
2014). Median & Mean of total export
0 (from 1988 to 2016) of US, Germany &
mean median sd
Japan are almost similar but SD varies
United States Germany Japan quite a bit, which indicates that the yearly
export varies significantly.
Inference
It is quite evident that India is distinct Top of other two countries but after Year 2013 there is a significant drop
for India while Vietnam and Bangladesh it is an up-word swing precisely due incentive extended to textile
sector by these countries. Indian government in the 2016-17 budget, reduced the customs duty on raw materials
for technical textiles to as low as 2.5%. Moreover, initiatives like tax incentives, job security and EPF schemes
will make the textile sector more robust. Also, Bangladesh introduced new textile policy in 2017 which aims
access to duty-free markets, and encourage the use of IT in textiles. Elimination of non-tariff barriers and
implementation of Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) has created huge investment in Vietnam’s textile
industry.
 Group 25 :The Global Financial Crisis And Its Impact On Trade
Abstract
Germany is driving the Eurozone’s fragile economic recovery. Though UK and Netherlands have similar mean
values of exports, Netherlands achieved significant improvement in exports over the years while controlling
imports. In contrast, UK’s export is stagnating while imports are growing.

Introduction.
The global financial crisis (GFC) refers to the period of extreme stress in global financial markets and banking
systems between mid-2007 and early 2009. World Economy had the Financial Crisis after Great Depression of
the 1930. Global financial crisis is extremely rare and this being third global crisis since the long depression of
1873 to 1879. Current ‘’Great Recession’’ was the “Great Trade Collapse” where by trade declined rapidly
during 2008 and 2009.Below mentioned is the visual analysis of “Great Trade Collapse” for European
countries.(USD in Thousands)
Chart 1

Export data of European Countries(2001-2016)

15,000.00
10,000.00
5,000.00
-

ve …
Se n…
Po ay
Ge d
er ia

Bu um

Hu ce

M FYR

Ru gal

Slo ia,

m
Cy ia
Be ijan

No gro
Ar nia

Ire ry

Ki ey
ac ak d
on tan

Sw nia
te va

ite Tu en
Fin rk
nm s

Gr ia
De ru

M Kaz lan
lan

ia
Az en

do
a

rw
ee

rb
on o

d rk
ed
lga

rtu
or

ss
ba

ng
lgi

e d hs

ne
ba

M old
m

ia,

ng
Al

Un

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Import data of European Countries(2001-2016)

20000
10000
0
M …

Ru …
Az …

Ire g…

M …

M …

Slo …
Bu …
Cy a…

No …
Po …

…
Sw …
b…

Fin n…

Se …
Gr or…

Tu d…
e

rtu
ce

i
t

ve
a

ey
nd

rw
us

ite
lgi

i
rb
ss
on
za
n
ni

lg
m

ac
lan

ol
De

e
er

Ge
pr

ee
Be

rk
Hu

la

Un
ba
Ar

Ka
Al

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

To be more specific we have investigated the Export outlines of nine countries. For the year 2009 world trade
declined because of significant price declines for primary commodities such as petroleum & minerals. By the
end of 2009 global economic recovery began, there was a rapid bounce-back in trade for 2010 except few
countries like Albania Montenegro & Holy See Below is the visual summary for the same. Even though growth
had increased internally within in countries it could not match up with its contribution to world trade shows in
2009& 2010
Table 01
Country Growth rate in 2010 compared to 2009 2009 2010
Germany 14.37 8.406 7.882
France 7.99 3.931 3.481
Italy 9.73 3.142 2.827
United Kingdom 10.53 2.854 2.586
Netherlands 15.78 2.989 2.838
Russian Federation 27.80 2.532 2.653
Ireland 4.36 1.204 1.030
Denmark 4.12 0.689 0.588
Albania -56.49 0.030 0.011
Montenegro -5.98 0.004 0.003
Holy See -65.70 0.000 0.000

Chart 2
Focused European countries-Exports

Focused European Country Exports

15000

10000

5000

0
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Germany France Italy

United Kingdom Netherlands Russian Federation
Ireland Denmark Albania
Montenegro Holy See

By the above graphic analysis we can make out German economy rebounded strongly in 2010.Exports from
Germany, grew by 14.2% in 2010, following a 14.3% decline in 2009. (Table 01)
Therefore we can accomplish Germany is driving the Eurozone’s fragile economic recovery, whereas smaller
economies such as Ireland, Greece and Portugal, Montenegro, Holy see have been struggling with large debts
& exports also has a downfall gradually.(Chart 3).
Below are the Centrality Measures which distinguishes between countries based on their Exports between (2001
to2016).
Table 2
Country Mean Median Mode Minimum Maximum Range
Germany 10,865.16 11681 #N/A 5434 14033 8599
France 4,920.36 5054 #N/A 2983 6166 3182
Italy 4,027.73 4262 #N/A 2246 5118 2872
United Kingdom 3,887.40 3887 #N/A 2651 5186 2535
Netherlands 3,823.39 4111 #N/A 1832 5261 3429
Russian Federation 3,314.82 3235 #N/A 1040 5344 4304
Ireland 1,428.99 1488 #N/A 865 1671 806
Denmark 823.39 851 #N/A 450 1042 592
Albania 15.32 18 #N/A 4 37 33
Montenegro 3.74 5 0 0 7 7
Holy See 0.10 0 #N/A 0 1 1

In the above table U.K & Netherlands seems to have similar among the mean but highly different among there
spread therefore let us quantify the spread or dispersion of export receipts between U.K Netherland using
Dispersion measures such as by Mean Absolute Deviation,Varince & Standard Deviation.
Table 3
Mean Absolute
Country Deviation Variance Standard Deviation
UK 625 550166 742
Netherland 948 1251380 1119

Therefore from table 3 we can conclude that even though UK & Netherlands had similar average receipts they
vastly differ in how their trade are dispersed over the years from 2001 to 2016.