Emanuel Ornelas
LightNews LightNews
emanuelornelas.bsky.social
Emanuel Ornelas
@emanuelornelas.bsky.social
110 followers 120 following 6 posts
Professor of Economics @ Sao Paulo School of Economics - FGV
Research on International Trade; Torcedor do/Fan of CAM; 🇧🇷🇬🇧

https://sites.google.com/site/emanuelornelaseo/
Posts Replies Media Videos
emanuelornelas.bsky.social
Service Offshoring and Export Experience url: academic.oup.com/ej/article-a...

Experienced exporters are more likely to source services at destination. Once offshoring, they exhibit reduced volatility and are less likely to exit foreign markets.
@gberlingieri.bsky.social
Service Offshoring and Export Experience
Abstract. Service inputs significantly influence export costs and firm internationalisation. A new dataset on French firms’ participation in global value c
academic.oup.com
August 18, 2025 at 1:12 AM
Reposted by Emanuel Ornelas
voxeu.org
J Hinz, @schularick.bsky.social, @ckhead.bsky.social, I Mejean, & @emanuelornelas.bsky.social‬ argue the only effective response to Trump's #tariffs is a united one. Unified retaliation by the EU, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, & South Korea would be impossible to ignore.
cepr.org/voxeu/column...
#EconSky
Chart of short-run changes in real production under different tariff scenarios for Germany, France, Brazil, Mexico, Canada, the US and the EU. The US administration’s latest threat to impose sweeping new tariffs on many of its closest allies signals a renewed embrace of aggressive unilateralism and misunderstood economics. This column argues that the only effective response is a coordinated one. Unified retaliation by a coalition of like-minded countries made up of the EU, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, and South Korea – which together account for more than 50% of all US goods exports – would be impossible for Washington to ignore and would send a powerful message that the rules-based global trading system is worth defending.
July 28, 2025 at 8:49 AM
emanuelornelas.bsky.social
Let’s not lose sight of the big picture. Appeasement won’t work. Instead of rushing to minimize short-term costs, we should stick to WTO principles and pursue a coordinated, proportional, multi-country retaliatory response against rule-breakers
kiel.institute Kiel Institut @kiel.institute · Jul 24
Simulations with the KITE Model show a joint response would raise US costs by 34% vs. no retaliation—reaching ~60% of the effect of a global reaction. In contrast, going it alone is less effective and riskier, esp. for integrated economies like 🇨🇦 & 🇲🇽 👇 @emanuelornelas.bsky.social @ckhead.bsky.social
kiel.institute Kiel Institut @kiel.institute · Jul 24
The US is playing countries off against each other. A coalition of the 🇪🇺,🇨🇦,🇲🇽,🇧🇷 & 🇰🇷 could put real pressure on Washington with a joint response. They would have strong leverage against tariffs. Read more in the new KPB 👉 ifw-kiel.de/publications...
@julianhi.nz @schularick.bsky.social
July 24, 2025 at 2:15 PM
emanuelornelas.bsky.social
A picture is (sometimes) worth just as the paper:
voxeu.org VoxEU @ CEPR @voxeu.org · Jun 11
The 2018-19 US-China #trade war failed to generate #employment gains in either the #US or #China. However, it did boost employment in #Brazil, showing that the clash created regional winners.
Tiago Cavalcanti, Pedro Ogeda, @emanuelornelas.bsky.social
cepr.org/voxeu/column...
#EconSky
Graph of the US-China trade war and Brazilian local labour markets: Formal employment. In June 2016, Donald Trump justified the protectionist policies during his first administration as “the quickest way to bring our jobs back to our country”. This column shows that while the trade war with China failed to create jobs at home, it did boost employment in Brazil. Regions in the country specialised in industries targeted by China’s trade policy towards the US experiencing a relative increase in formal employment and wage bills between 2016 and 2021. With tensions between major economies rising, policymakers in third countries should be aware not only of the risks of global fragmentation, but also of the opportunities it can create.
June 13, 2025 at 7:23 AM
emanuelornelas.bsky.social
An example of the intricate consequences of a trade war between large countries (and this was the “mild” trade war of 2018-2020…)
cep-lse.bsky.social Centre for Economic Performance @cep-lse.bsky.social · Jun 9
The 2018-2019 US-China trade war failed to create jobs at home, but did boost employment in Brazil.
Tiago Cavalcanti, Pedro Ogeda and @emanuelornelas.bsky.social‬

cepr.org/voxeu/colum...
The US-China trade war created jobs (elsewhere)
In June 2016, Donald Trump justified the protectionist policies during his first administration as “the quickest way to bring our jobs back to our country”. This column shows that while the trade war with China failed to create jobs at home, it did boost employment in Brazil. Regions in the country specialised in industries targeted by China’s trade policy towards the US experiencing a relative increase in formal employment and wage bills between 2016 and 2021. With tensions between major economies rising, policymakers in third countries should be aware not only of the risks of global fragmentation, but also of the opportunities it can create.
cepr.org
June 10, 2025 at 2:50 PM
Reposted by Emanuel Ornelas
reveconstudies.bsky.social
"This study estimates the carbon-efficient forest cover in the Brazilian Amazon. A $10/ton carbon tax could preserve 95% of the efficient carbon stock, avoiding 42B tons of CO2 & yielding $1.6T in welfare gains."

From @araujocrrafael.bsky.social , @franciscocosta.bsky.social & Sant'Anna

#EconSky 👇
May 17, 2025 at 10:07 PM
emanuelornelas.bsky.social
Trump justifies his protectionist policies as “the quickest way to bring our jobs back to our country.” We show that the first US–China trade war indeed created jobs — in Brazil.
cesifo.org CESifo @cesifo.org · May 6
🚨Working Paper Alert!
“The US-China Trade War Creates Jobs (Elsewhere)”
✒️ Tiago Cavalcanti, Pedro Molina Ogeda & Emanuel Ornelas

💼 Can a Trade War create new Jobs?
Find out: www.ifo.de/en/cesifo/pu...
May 7, 2025 at 12:26 PM