¶¶ÒùÊÓƵ

Language selection

Search

Canada’s export diversity by product

Colin Scarffe

2019-02-25

Table of Contents

1. Summary

  1. It is important to think of export diversity not just geographically, but also by product.
  2. Canada’s merchandise exports to the world are diversified by product at the HS2 level.
  3. Canadian merchandise exports to the majority of destination countries are concentrated by product, but are generally diversified for the larger markets.
  4. Almost all Canadian export products are heavily dependent on the United States.

2. Non-technical summary

This study focuses on the diversity of merchandise exports by product. Export diversity by product is important to hedge against price shocks and sector-specific drops in demand. Product diversity is also important for ensuring that a positive shock in demand or price for a given product does not appreciate the currency to the point it reduces the competitiveness of other industries.

While Canada is known to be as a large exporter of energy and autos, its overall exports are diversified by product. This does not mean that Canada is immune to shocks in key industries, but rather that the Canadian economy should be able to adjust in the event of a product-specific downturn.

Generally, the mix of products Canada exports to a given country is not diversified. However, Canada’s exports are diversified toward most of its largest trading partners. An increase in distance to a destination country is correlated with exports to that country becoming more concentrated, but an increase in economic size is correlated with higher export diversity to a destination country. In many cases, economic size is the dominant effect leading Canadian exports to be diverse to many large partner economies despite substantial distance.

 Canadian exports dependence on the United States is not a narrative limited to the energy and auto industries. Of the 99 export categories (96 HS2 products, unspecified products, aggregate merchandise, and commercial services), the U.S. is the largest destination for 91 of them, and has a share over half for 83 categories.

3. Introduction

A previous report looked at the geographic concentration of Canadian exports while this paper will assess the diversity of Canadian exports by product. Product or industry concentration is normally an issue for small developing countries that have a comparative advantage in a product—usually a natural resource—and that industry ends up dominating the country’s exports.Footnote 1 There are two challenges with having a dominant export; first, analogous to a financial portfolio, it is risky to have a single product make up a large share of exports as it leaves the country exposed to changes in the price or demand for this commodity. It is preferable to have diversified assets, or exports, to hedge against sector-specific shocks—if the price of a commodity decreases, the effects on the economy will be much different whether that commodity makes up 1% or 50% of overall exports. The second problem is known as Dutch disease. If a commodity makes up a large portion of exports, an increase in external demand for that commodity may appreciate the country’s currency, making imports cheaper and exports more expensive—both of which reduce the competitiveness of other industries, further concentrating the economy.

Most of the focus on export diversification has dealt with geographic diversification, or diversification away from the United States, but examining concentration by industry may provide additional insights. It is well known that Canadian exports are dependant on the United States. However, diversifying away from the U.S. market can have different implications and may require a different strategy depending on whether the source of the concentration is a limited number of products or is broad-based, and whether it’s realistic for Canadian firms in some industries to export their products globally. This paper is focused on the diversity of Canadian merchandise exports by product, but will also look at export diversity for various product-country combinations.

4. Product diversity

As was done in Canada’s Geographic Export Diversity, concentration will be measured by the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI).Footnote 2 The HHI, a sum of squared shares, is the most commonly used measure of export concentration; an HHI below 0.15 is considered diversified and an HHI above 0.25 is considered concentrated.Footnote 3 Using the two digit HS level (96 product categories), the HHI was 0.085 in 2017, indicating that Canadian exports are diversified by product.Footnote 4 This might not have been the ex-ante expectation, as Canada is known for its high share of energy and auto exports. Energy exports and auto exports are both critical to the Canadian economy, but because Canada’s exports are so substantial, these products make up relatively modest shares of overall exports; in 2017, their respective shares were 21% and 16%. The impact of the United States on Canadian exports is clear as Canada sends over 90% of both auto and energy sector exports to that country.

Figure 1: HHI by Product

Figure 1: HHI by Product
Text version
HHIÉnergieAutosMachines
19900.0858040.0114330.0509640.007453
19910.0856990.0130420.0496680.007083
19920.0881050.0119810.0537120.007036
19930.0985790.0119810.0642820.007758
19940.0971770.0099990.0641820.00809
19950.0887670.0090520.0547430.008846
19960.0849310.0119920.0480830.009251
19970.0850160.0114540.0492090.008939
19980.0871370.00760.0539040.010435
19990.0998130.0081330.0672740.009212
20000.0935790.0195830.0497310.008324
20010.0918710.0231830.0468350.008357
20020.0924620.0181750.0533430.008144
20030.0943370.0291370.0462370.007251
20040.0917170.0306890.0418790.006973
20050.09780.0446750.0353630.006557
20060.0914150.0433830.0303690.006475
20070.089210.0467210.0250970.006843
20080.1106170.0819340.0133730.006082
20090.0876030.0565480.0123780.007497
20100.0934420.0599150.0168680.005536
20110.1009090.069870.0145630.005148
20120.1040090.0693680.0192320.005511
20130.1064370.0737260.0178480.004909
20140.1102030.0786440.0170580.00505
20150.080450.0392910.0237270.006321
20160.0767520.0283720.0301930.00653
20170.0854750.0443390.0240850.006451

An HHI indicating that Canadian exports are diversified by product does not mean that Canada is immune to industry-specific shocks. The price of Western Canadian Select crude oil went from 86.56 (USD/bbl) in June 2014 to 16.30 (USD/bbl) in February 2016 causing a shallow recession that lasted two quarters at the beginning of 2015 and led the Bank of Canada to cut interest rates twice.Footnote 5 Yet, Canada’s export diversity by product meant that the oil price shock only triggered a modest economic contraction and the Canadian economy was able to adjust and resume growing despite the continuing decrease in oil prices.

Figure 2: Oil Prices and GDP Growth

Figure 2: Oil Prices and GDP Growth
Text version
GDP DatesGDP Growth
Q1 20120.001894
Q2 20120.013499
Q3 20120.005296
Q4 20120.008211
Q1 20130.036064
Q2 20130.023529
Q3 20130.032742
Q4 20130.042784
Q1 20140.005677
Q2 20140.037619
Q3 20140.038757
Q4 20140.028487
Q1 2015-0.02159
Q2 2015-0.01074
Q3 20150.014103
Q4 20150.002705
Q1 20160.023953
Q2 2016-0.01806
Q3 20160.044094
Q4 20160.023455
Q1 20170.040936
Q2 20170.04401
Q3 20170.013258
Q4 20170.017048

 

Oil PricesOil Prices dates
86.47Jan-12
83.04Feb-12
75.01Mar-12
70.4Apr-12
75.1May-12
66.37Jun-12
64.28Jul-12
69.03Aug-12
78.17Sep-12
79.88Oct-12
72.47Nov-12
57.87Dec-12
62.11Jan-13
58.4Feb-13
66.72Mar-13
68.87Apr-13
80.93May-13
75.39Jun-13
90.5Jul-13
90.97Aug-13
83.57Sep-13
74.21Oct-13
62.62Nov-13
58.95Dec-13
65.69Jan-14
81.54Feb-14
79.42Mar-14
79.56Apr-14
82.72May-14
86.56Jun-14
82.73Jul-14
73.89Aug-14
74.35Sep-14
70.6Oct-14
62.87Nov-14
43.24Dec-14
30.43Jan-15
36.52Feb-15
34.76Mar-15
40.26Apr-15
47.5May-15
51.29Jun-15
43.49Jul-15
29.48Aug-15
26.5Sep-15
32.78Oct-15
27.78Nov-15
22.51Dec-15
17.88Jan-16
16.3Feb-16
23.46Mar-16
27.88Apr-16
32.52May-16
36.47Jun-16
32.8Jul-16
30.9Aug-16
30.62Sep-16
35.83Oct-16
31.89Nov-16
37.18Dec-16
37.19Jan-17
39.14Feb-17
35.68Mar-17
36.84Apr-17
38.84May-17
35.8Jun-17
36.37Jul-17
38.5Aug-17
39.93Sep-17
39.87Oct-17
45.52Nov-17
44.02Dec-17

5. Product diversity by destination

Product diversity by destination economy is important as it is one aspect of bargaining power when it comes to tariffs and free trade agreements. If, for example, Canada’s exports to a given economy are concentrated, the prospect of a tariff on the concentrated industry is a much bigger threat than if Canadian exports are diversified. Based on Canada’s exports to 223 destinations in 2017, Canadian exports were concentrated by product (HHI>0.25) for 106 destinations and they were diversified by product (HHI<0.15) for 65 destinations.

Figure 3: Product Diversity by Destination

Figure 3: Product Diversity by Destination
Text version
RankHHICountry
11Bouvet Island
21Cocos (Keeling) Islands
31Nauru
41Niue
50.981196Botswana
60.978847Gibraltar
70.941163Malta
80.935354Korea, Dem. Rep.
90.925399Latvia
100.879343Lesotho
110.876948Seychelles
120.855421Antarctica
130.84285Heard Island and McDonald Isla
140.842392Fr. So. Ant. Tr
150.82621Solomon Islands
160.785951British Indian Ocean Ter.
170.771926Cook Islands
180.737633Somalia
190.731819Bahamas, The
200.67737Malawi
210.653002Falkland Island
220.624439Tonga
230.611806Kiribati
240.575831Cambodia
250.566741Sao Tome and Principe
260.562806United Kingdom
270.561825Cameroon
280.559919Central African Republic
290.550635Bulgaria
300.5421Zimbabwe
310.539427Guinea-Bissau
320.537329Angola
330.523132Turkmenistan
340.522615Mozambique
350.520208Kyrgyz Republic
360.519197Lao PDR
370.512152Montenegro
380.511805Fiji
390.509658Wallis and Futura Isl.
400.503721Macedonia, FYR
410.497405Burundi
420.494974Ethiopia(excludes Eritrea)
430.485931Nigeria
440.474148Ukraine
450.468573Maldives
460.459759Afghanistan
470.458899Equatorial Guinea
480.456933Morocco
490.446538Norfolk Island
500.445013Pitcairn
510.432854Yemen
520.426327Bhutan
530.419259Algeria
540.416504Georgia
550.404014Tajikistan
560.401112Sudan
570.392137New Caledonia
580.392014Cape Verde
590.389397Slovenia
600.388351Congo, Dem. Rep.
610.382569Pakistan
620.378183Trinidad and Tobago
630.376178Rwanda
640.37615Eritrea
650.367654Ecuador
660.361926Libya
670.359811Tanzania
680.358087Kazakhstan
690.356644Bangladesh
700.352224Guam
710.352068Peru
720.348588American Samoa
730.343916Syrian Arab Republic
740.343914Austria
750.343127Greenland
760.338117Sri Lanka
770.336194Sierra Leone
780.330995Mali
790.325363Myanmar
800.325253Bolivia
810.321417Montserrat
820.317926Mongolia
830.314005Iran, Islamic Rep.
840.309023Togo
850.306855Luxembourg
860.303388Switzerland
870.302515Samoa
880.302341Mauritania
890.30029Kenya
900.297446Venezuela
910.294905Lithuania
920.294294Benin
930.290534United States Minor Outlying I
940.288515Saudi Arabia
950.287781Tunisia
960.287522Madagascar
970.285439Gabon
980.276457Gambia, The
990.270573Saint Helena
1000.269191Western Sahara
1010.268671Armenia
1020.262849Senegal
1030.259811Bahrain
1040.257181Iraq
1050.253478Burkina Faso
1060.251754Christmas Island
1070.247101Nepal
1080.247034Faeroe Islands
1090.245745Norway
1100.244344Iceland
1110.241999Ghana
1120.241544Chad
1130.234461Congo, Rep.
1140.229556Indonesia
1150.228072Uzbekistan
1160.225179French Polynesia
1170.222558Bonaire
1180.221554Cote d'Ivoire
1190.217885Finland
1200.212939Cayman Islands
1210.212807Poland
1220.212768Uganda
1230.210382Denmark
1240.210286Guinea
1250.206305Vanuatu
1260.206134British Virgin Islands
1270.20503Zambia
1280.20178Papua New Guinea
1290.200532Portugal
1300.197351Albania
1310.196727Belgium
1320.196255Paraguay
1330.195574Djibouti
1340.193586Colombia
1350.192984Haiti
1360.186997Swaziland
1370.186693Croatia
1380.185965Moldova
1390.181931Suriname
1400.181922East Timor
1410.180157Ireland
1420.178946Niger
1430.17803Oman
1440.172332Comoros
1450.167545Lebanon
1460.165194Macao
1470.162748Azerbaijan
1480.162727Uruguay
1490.162697Belarus
1500.15863Brazil
1510.157073Czech Republic
1520.156Andorra
1530.154249South Sudan
1540.154116Argentina
1550.152935Sweden
1560.152011Romania
1570.151801Greece
1580.151034Bosnia and Herzegovina
1590.14952Saint Pierre and Miquelon
1600.148338United Arab Emirates
1610.142673Liberia
1620.14214Estonia
1630.142117Nicaragua
1640.139335Qatar
1650.138825Dominican Republic
1660.137944Russian Federation
1670.136195St. Vincent and the Grenadines
1680.135012Hungary
1690.134733Mauritius
1700.133036Anguila
1710.131426Korea, Rep.
1720.130154Belize
1730.126205Costa Rica
1740.124733India
1750.123035Guatemala
1760.121913Cyprus
1770.121242Singapore
1780.121118United States
1790.12061Vietnam
1800.12017Jordan
1810.11992Brunei
1820.118947Spain
1830.118852Kuwait
1840.118518South Africa
1850.117973St. Lucia
1860.117502Turks and Caicos Isl.
1870.116688Guyana
1880.115894Serbia, FR(Serbia/Montenegro)
1890.114622El Salvador
1900.113392Grenada
1910.11097Italy
1920.108196Philippines
1930.106621Honduras
1940.106054Aruba
1950.102906Malaysia
1960.102237Türkiye
1970.101844France
1980.101217Netherlands
1990.101109Australia
2000.101098Dominica
2010.098961Slovak Republic
2020.097827Egypt, Arab Rep.
2030.096838Antigua and Barbuda
2040.096141Jamaica
2050.094113Namibia
2060.093188Bermuda
2070.092859Israel
2080.092049Japan
2090.089887Cuba
2100.089214Thailand
2110.087245All countries  All --- All  
2120.085564Other Asia, nes
2130.083876Saint Maarten (Dutch part)
2140.082837Hong Kong, China
2150.081238Curaçao
2160.077597Panama
2170.077495China
2180.077037Germany
2190.073765Barbados
2200.073505Mexico
2210.072999New Zealand
2220.072713Chile
2230.064242St. Kitts and Nevis

As mentioned in Canada’s Geographic Export Diversity, the gravity model of trade can be useful for explaining trade flows. The farther away a country is from Canada, the more costly it makes trade. A reasonable hypothesis derived from the observed cross-section of data is that transport costs differ by industry, making it unfeasible to export some products over long distances, thus concentrating Canada’s exports on products with relatively low transport costs. A linear regression of export concentration on distance shows that distance enters positively (an increase in distance is correlated with an increase in concentration).

However, economic size also matters. Of Canada’s top 10 trading partners (by export value, accounting for 91% of total exports), 8 can be classified as diversified by product (HHI<0.15), one is moderately diversified (Belgium, HHI=0.19), and only one is classified as concentrated (the U.K., HHI=0.56), suggesting that where there is sufficient demand, Canadian exports are diversified by product.Footnote 6 One way to separate distance from demand is by aggregating countries into regions—it’s more likely that a region will have demand for every product while still displaying variation in distance. By region, Canada’s exports are diversified and, interestingly, the second and third most concentrated regions are Europe and North America. Footnote 7

Figure 4: Canada's Region-Product Diversity

Figure 4: Canada's Region-Product Diversity
Text version
Afrique subsaharienneEurope -Asie centraleAmérique du NordAsie du SudAutres régionsMoyen-Orient – Afrique du NordAsie de l’Est – PacifiqueAmérique latine – Caraïbes
HHI0.1435140.1425750.1211070.0962320.0950270.0933010.0582030.055833

A simple linear regression of concentration on distance and GDP (by country) can be used to determine the correlation between concentration and the two explanatory variables, formally:Footnote 8

math equation
Text version

The HHI to country i is equal to a constant plus beta one times the natural log of distance to country i, plus beta two times the natural log of the gdp of country i, plus an error term.

VariableCoefficientT-statistic
Constant-0.745-2.40
Distance0.1273.74
GDP-0.032-5.46

The regression shows that Canadian exports become more concentrated the further away an economy is located, but become more diversified as the size of the partner economy increases. Again, the interpretation is that where there is sufficient demand for Canadian products, Canadian exporters are able to overcome the higher transport (or fixed) costs associated with greater distance. An example is Türkiye and Bulgaria, both located far away (7993 km for Bulgaria, and 8626 km for Türkiye); however, Türkiye’s GDP is 20 times that of Bulgaria. Consequently, the HHI of exports to Türkiye is 0.1 (diversified), while the HHI of exports to Bulgaria is 0.55 (highly concentrated).

The regression has an R2 of only 0.21, which means that there are certainly other factors involved in determining concentration. Common confounders could be things such as free-trade agreements, whether or not the partner is a market economy, a common language, and having similar cultures. An argument could be made that if one or more of these variables are correlated with market size or distance, not accounting for them in the above regression would produce biased results.

Figure 5: HHI by Product

Figure 5: HHI by Product
Text version
Date SeriesHHI ChinaHHI U.S. by product
19900.2696810.123348
19910.2526990.121125
19920.3375750.121327
19930.1351490.127544
19940.143660.1247
19950.1640570.115002
19960.1687670.10782
19970.0911550.106441
19980.0996540.10627
19990.1031590.119772
20000.0795760.111038
20010.0708510.109025
20020.0754110.109859
20030.0836960.114306
20040.0753580.114043
20050.0621840.121994
20060.0689070.11859
20070.0723910.121904
20080.0634790.151869
20090.0780930.120951
20100.0710590.133312
20110.0765560.144404
20120.0830010.148874
20130.079610.15242
20140.0792110.156445
20150.0729370.112726
20160.0722060.104253
20170.0757060.116787

However, very few (if any) of these confounders apply to China, which has a very large economy and is far away. China was Canada’s second largest trading partner in 2017 (third if the EU is counted as a whole), with exports to China totaling $23.6 billion. The narrative surrounding Canadian exports to China is generally that due to distance and other barriers, they are concentrated in specific industries—namely natural resources. Canada’s exports to China are actually rather diversified. No industry contributes more than 20% of Canada’s exports to China, and only two, oil seeds (16.3%) and wood pulp (15.5%), represent more than 10%. Based on the HHI for 2017, Canada’s exports to China are actually more diversified than its exports to the United States. China provides an example that Canada is able to export in a wide array of industries despite existing barriers. Further, the diversity of products exported to China leaves Canada less exposed to a potential increase in China’s tariffs on any individual industry, or to a demand by China to reduce exports of any individual product, as it would only represent a small proportion of total exports to that country.

6. Destination diversity by product

The complementary approach to examining the concentration of products toward each destination is to examine the concentration of destinations for each product. Of the 96 HS2 export products, plus a category for unclassified goods, the overall aggregate, and commercial services, only three are classified as geographically diversified by the HHI guidelines (HHI<0.15).Footnote 9 Of these 99 categories, the United States holds the largest share for 91 of them and makes up over half in 83 categories. This illustrates that Canada’s export reliance on the United States is not a feature exclusive to a few industries, but is a characteristic of almost all Canadian export industries. To illustrate, autos and energy exports are thought to be two of the most concentrated, and almost exclusively destined for the United States; however, autos are only the 12th most concentrated industry while energy is the 20th, despite U.S. shares of 94% and 91%, respectively. At the other end of the spectrum, ores, slag and ash is the second most diversified industry with a U.S. share of only 5%.

Figure 6: Canada's Product-Country Diversity

Figure 6: Canada's Product-Country Diversity
Text version
RankHHIHS code
10.99341346
20.9845166
30.95917418
40.9418229
50.94050619
60.93502557
70.9302971
80.92560352
90.92468678
100.89272294
110.8885996
120.88658887
130.87502568
140.86176314
150.85600956
160.85398270
170.84660454
180.8464880
190.84617660
200.82867427
210.82643539
220.82535751
230.82480286
240.81610432
250.809255
260.80841440
270.80711673
280.77560616
290.76488576
300.76242779
310.76118383
320.75358334
330.75353537
340.75276322
350.74956620
360.72985774
370.72799724
380.71482348
390.70066164
400.69410817
410.68878772
420.67973589
430.67295121
440.66921233
450.66480359
460.66343725
470.6628269
480.63428138
490.62856628
500.62770599
510.60261884
520.60155544
530.59718962
540.59512291
550.58221167
560.568236Grand Total
570.55346429
580.5498985
590.54180311
600.53447653
610.53270865
620.53002497
630.51829649
640.49922115
650.4720558
660.46413566
670.46250242
680.46136461
690.45292235
700.4501068
710.44918123
720.44805682
730.42786Commercial Services
740.41522630
750.41350393
760.40744195
770.39973350
780.38925431
790.38709990
800.3869853
810.38321241
820.38160471
830.37482592
840.35290445
850.32549963
860.2986782
870.29458947
880.2780285
890.26466888
900.23652336
910.2282394
920.2187257
930.20554681
940.19250212
950.16033875
960.1587743
970.14562813
980.0875926
990.07205410

If only a few industries were concentrated, it could be concluded that Canada simply needs to focus on different industries as some products cannot be exported beyond the United States. However, as concentration is broad based, it is consistent with the previous assertion that concentration is not caused by an inability of Canadian exporters; instead, it is the strength of the attraction toward the United States that leads firms across all industries to naturally export to that country, which is the source of the concentration. This also implies that export diversification will be difficult to achieve. In order for exports to become more diversified, the natural choice, not of a single firm but of thousands of firms simultaneously, must be overcome. This is not to say that the goal of diversification should be that Canadian firms cease to export to the United States; rather, it is simply suggesting that it will be difficult to divert even partially the flow of exports toward other countries.

7. Conclusion

Canadian exports are diversified by product. This does not mean that Canada’s economy is immune to industry-specific shocks, but this diversification means that Canada’s economy should be able to adjust to an industry-specific downturn. Canadian exports are concentrated in many countries, but this appears more likely to be the result of a lack of demand from these countries rather than an inability of exporters to reach their market. Additionally, across almost all industries, the natural choice is to export to the United States, and thus export diversification may prove difficult as it will have to work against natural economic forces.

8. References

Government of Canada, Trade Data Online. Retrieved from .

Head, Keith, and Thierry Mayer. “Gravity equations: Workhorse, toolkit, and cookbook.” In Handbook of International Economics, 4:131–195. Elsevier, 2014.

Head, Keith, Thierry Mayer and John Ries. “The erosion of colonial trade linkages after independence.” Journal of International Economics, 81, no. 1 (2010): 1–14.

IMF. “A Weakening Global Expansion,” World Economic Outlook, Update, January 2019.

Scarffe, Colin. Canada’s Geographic Export Diversity, ¶¶ÒùÊÓƵ, 2019.

Statistics Canada. .

Statistics Canada. Canadian Export Diversification. Catalogue no. 13-605-X, ISSN: 1705-9658, 2018.

United Nations Statistics Division. UN Comtrade. New York: United Nations. Retrieved from: .

WCS Source: Alberta Energy (Jan 2009 to present). Retrieved from: .

9. Appendix: Measurement

Measuring export concentration raises an issue because no tools have been developed exclusively to measure trade concentration. All existing tools borrow from other branches of economics that deal with concentration—portfolio theory, income inequality, and competition economics. As a result, these tools provide some guidance, but the economic or axiomatic justification for the choice of an index is lacking in the trade concentration field. Fortunately, the measures available tell the same story about Canada’s export concentration, and thus the discussion of the best measure is somewhat superfluous in the Canadian context. The measure selected for this analysis was the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI), defined below:

The closer to 1, the more the market is concentrated, and the closer to 0, the more it is diversified. For example, if Canada exported one product, the index would be 1, and if Canada’s exports were divided evenly between 100 different products, the index would be 0.01. As an approximate guideline, an HHI above 0.25 is considered concentrated and an HHI below 0.15 is considered diversified (internationally accepted guidelines taken from Statistics Canada). These are of course just guidelines, but the advantage of the HHI is that it is simple to decompose it into parts and to pursue the reasoning further. As the analysis of Canadian exports was insensitive to the selected measure, the HHI was chosen due to its relative simplicity.

One drawback of the HHI is that it is sensitive to the level of disaggregation. Because the shares in the index are squared, the more disaggregated the data, the lower the level of the index. As the number of products affects the level of the index (if there were only two products the least the index could be is 0.5), a normalized HHI can be calculated to solve this issue; however, there are 96 categories at the HS2 level and therefore the normalized index is unnecessary.

When examining products, the sensitivity to the level of aggregation can potentially raise issues. When assessing geography, it is easier to argue that categories are independent from size. There are large and small countries; size does not determine whether it is a distinct country or a part of another country. At a more disaggregated level, size again does not determine the number of states or provinces. However, with products, size may well determine whether some products get their own category at a given level of aggregation—in economics terms, product groupings may be endogenous to their size. At the lowest level of aggregation, the idea is that every product has its own classification, but at any higher level of aggregation, product groupings are somewhat arbitrary. For example, should rear-wheel drive cars be split from front-wheel drive cars at the same level that distinguishes between different grades of crude oil?

Only at the most disaggregated level, where every product has its own code, does the classification not suffer from the arbitrariness (or endogeneity) of product groupings. However, choosing the lowest level would cause the concentration index to be very close to zero. The highest level of aggregation still raises problems but the arbitrariness of distinctions is hopefully less important than at any lower level of aggregation. For more on how aggregation affects the HHI and other concentration indices, see Canada’s Geographic Export Diversity.

Date modified: