The traditional classification of trade strategies into “import substitution” (IS) and “export promotion” (EP) is based on the traditional two-sector trade model. In the context of a three-sector model—including nontradeables—there is potentially greater analytical richness and (apparently) greater possibility of a wider range of ex ante trade strategies. Included among these possibilities is a mixed IS/EP strategy, which generates a protradeable bias. This paper investigates the properties of a general equilibrium model and the necessary commercial policy interventions required to bring about particular changes in relative prices. Detailed evidence on revealed trade regime biases (within the tradeables good sectors and between tradeables and nontradeables) is provided for Barbados. The evidence indicates that ex post classification of trade strategy may differ significantly from the ex ante or intended strategy, and that use of partial equilibrium estimates of effective protection of tradeables alone is likely to be an inappropriate means of classifying trade strategies.
