Amid a general rise in protectionism and a trade war between the world's two largest economies, this paper analyzes changes in gains from trade for the world over a decade marked by rapid global economic integration preceding the global financial crisis of 2007-08. It employs state-of-the-art quantitative trade models based on the gravity equation to estimate autarky gains from trade, as well as a recently introduced ANOVA-type structural estimation of the gravity equation to obtain trade costs free of residual trade cost bias. Between 1995 and 2006, the cost of moving to autarky increased by about 45% on average. A decomposition exercise suggests most of the increase in autarky gains from trade on average was due to increases in import shares in total spending, with a limited role for reallocations of spending across sectors with varied trade elasticities. Changes in trade costs between 1995 and 2006 are found to have increased autarky gains from trade, as measured in 2006, by up to 100%.
{"title":"Dissecting Gains from Trade: Changes in Welfare Cost of Autarky","authors":"P. Kharel","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3264551","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3264551","url":null,"abstract":"Amid a general rise in protectionism and a trade war between the world's two largest economies, this paper analyzes changes in gains from trade for the world over a decade marked by rapid global economic integration preceding the global financial crisis of 2007-08. It employs state-of-the-art quantitative trade models based on the gravity equation to estimate autarky gains from trade, as well as a recently introduced ANOVA-type structural estimation of the gravity equation to obtain trade costs free of residual trade cost bias. Between 1995 and 2006, the cost of moving to autarky increased by about 45% on average. A decomposition exercise suggests most of the increase in autarky gains from trade on average was due to increases in import shares in total spending, with a limited role for reallocations of spending across sectors with varied trade elasticities. Changes in trade costs between 1995 and 2006 are found to have increased autarky gains from trade, as measured in 2006, by up to 100%.","PeriodicalId":197385,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Import/Export Strategies (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128496917","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The link between exchange rate and trade has been studied for a long time, but there is no consensus about their relation. This paper tests the old argument, whether depreciation of real effective exchange rates (REERs) raises exports. We differentiate the test with earlier studies by employing a new measurement of REER and incorporating the effect of GVCs. We measured REER at industry level with value‐added trade weights. We analysed the topic with LSDV and system GMM for China, Japan and Korea since these counties are known to participate actively in GVCs. Our main finding is that exchange rate has significant impact on trade for three countries. However, the movement of elasticity of export to REER varies by country. While the elasticity in China decreased over time, Korea and Japan experienced increasing patterns between mid‐1990s and mid‐2000s and decreasing trends afterwards. This study also tests whether the level of incorporation in GVCs causes a change in elasticity. The results show that growing participation in GVCs lowers the elasticity of export to REER in absolute value. However, this result is only statistically significant in Korea.
{"title":"Global Value Chain and its Impact on the Linkage between Exchange Rate and Export: Cases of China, Japan and Korea","authors":"Hokyung Bang, Misook Park","doi":"10.1111/twec.12595","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/twec.12595","url":null,"abstract":"The link between exchange rate and trade has been studied for a long time, but there is no consensus about their relation. This paper tests the old argument, whether depreciation of real effective exchange rates (REERs) raises exports. We differentiate the test with earlier studies by employing a new measurement of REER and incorporating the effect of GVCs. We measured REER at industry level with value‐added trade weights. We analysed the topic with LSDV and system GMM for China, Japan and Korea since these counties are known to participate actively in GVCs. Our main finding is that exchange rate has significant impact on trade for three countries. However, the movement of elasticity of export to REER varies by country. While the elasticity in China decreased over time, Korea and Japan experienced increasing patterns between mid‐1990s and mid‐2000s and decreasing trends afterwards. This study also tests whether the level of incorporation in GVCs causes a change in elasticity. The results show that growing participation in GVCs lowers the elasticity of export to REER in absolute value. However, this result is only statistically significant in Korea.","PeriodicalId":197385,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Import/Export Strategies (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127410685","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Turkey's export rediscount credit programme provides credit to exporting firms that is both easy to acquire and is offered at a low interest rate. We follow the performance of firms that first received the credit in 2012 when the amount of credit provided went up dramatically in 2012. We use propensity score mathing to construct a control group of firms with which we compare the credit-receiving firms before and after 2012 in a difference-in-differences framework. These firms have increased their exports substantially in the following years compared to the matched firms with similar propensities to receive the rediscount credit. We find that firms that received the rediscount credit increased their exports by 65% and total sales by 19% compared to matched firms. We find no statistically significant effects on domestic sales and profits. We also find suggestive evidence that the effects fade away after a certain amount of credits.
{"title":"Do Subsidised Export Loans Increase Exports?","authors":"Y. E. Akgunduz, S. Kal, Huzeyfe Torun","doi":"10.1111/twec.12580","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/twec.12580","url":null,"abstract":"Turkey's export rediscount credit programme provides credit to exporting firms that is both easy to acquire and is offered at a low interest rate. We follow the performance of firms that first received the credit in 2012 when the amount of credit provided went up dramatically in 2012. We use propensity score mathing to construct a control group of firms with which we compare the credit-receiving firms before and after 2012 in a difference-in-differences framework. These firms have increased their exports substantially in the following years compared to the matched firms with similar propensities to receive the rediscount credit. We find that firms that received the rediscount credit increased their exports by 65% and total sales by 19% compared to matched firms. We find no statistically significant effects on domestic sales and profits. We also find suggestive evidence that the effects fade away after a certain amount of credits.","PeriodicalId":197385,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Import/Export Strategies (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116774314","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
M. Lubinga, N. Mazibuko, S. Ngqangweni, Y. Potelwa, Bonani Nyhodo
South Africa’s industries in the agricultural sector spend some of the statutory levy income on export promotion and market development (EPMD) activities. Some industries argue that statutory levy expenditure on EPMD activities generates satisfactory returns on investment but empirical evidence is yet to be presented to support the argument. Hence, this study filled this gap by building a unique data set based on statutory levy expenditure on EPMD for four industries (citrus, deciduous fruits, table grapes and wine) and used econometric analysis to assess the impact of EPMD on social welfare over a 10-year period (2006–2015). Furthermore, we estimated the returns generated on social welfare per rand of statutory levy expenditure. In the analysis, we controlled for unobserved heterogeneity, multicollinearity and reverse causality. The results suggest that statutory levy expenditure on EPMD has a statistically significant positive impact on social welfare across the four industries. On average, a unit increase in statutory levy expenditure on EPMD leads to an improvement in social welfare ranging between 0.2% and 0.4% depending on the industry. In addition, the results suggest that 1 rand spent on EPMD for the four industries in question, on average, generates a US$26 worth of improvement in social welfare. Conclusively, statutory levy expenditure on EPMD played a key role in enhancing social welfare improvement. Therefore, there is a need to mobilise more resources to facilitate the EPMD initiative into new markets and products for the industries.
{"title":"Impact of Export Promotion and Market Development on Social Welfare in South Africa: Evidence From the Agricultural Sector","authors":"M. Lubinga, N. Mazibuko, S. Ngqangweni, Y. Potelwa, Bonani Nyhodo","doi":"10.4102/AEJ.V6I2.245","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4102/AEJ.V6I2.245","url":null,"abstract":"South Africa’s industries in the agricultural sector spend some of the statutory levy income on export promotion and market development (EPMD) activities. Some industries argue that statutory levy expenditure on EPMD activities generates satisfactory returns on investment but empirical evidence is yet to be presented to support the argument. Hence, this study filled this gap by building a unique data set based on statutory levy expenditure on EPMD for four industries (citrus, deciduous fruits, table grapes and wine) and used econometric analysis to assess the impact of EPMD on social welfare over a 10-year period (2006–2015). Furthermore, we estimated the returns generated on social welfare per rand of statutory levy expenditure. In the analysis, we controlled for unobserved heterogeneity, multicollinearity and reverse causality. The results suggest that statutory levy expenditure on EPMD has a statistically significant positive impact on social welfare across the four industries. On average, a unit increase in statutory levy expenditure on EPMD leads to an improvement in social welfare ranging between 0.2% and 0.4% depending on the industry. In addition, the results suggest that 1 rand spent on EPMD for the four industries in question, on average, generates a US$26 worth of improvement in social welfare. Conclusively, statutory levy expenditure on EPMD played a key role in enhancing social welfare improvement. Therefore, there is a need to mobilise more resources to facilitate the EPMD initiative into new markets and products for the industries.","PeriodicalId":197385,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Import/Export Strategies (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129041549","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The 21st century suggests a somewhat vexing scenario of ‘new protectionism’, especially with the rise of protectionist non-tariff measures or NTMs. This largely refers to standard-like NTMs (sanitary and phytosanitary measures and technical barriers to trade, known as SPS and TBTs, respectively) with a dual purpose of non-trade policy objectives and (hidden/ concealed) protectionism. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) are found to be high users of standard-like NTMs relative to other traditional measures to regulate trade. This begs the question if there has been an intentional shift towards murky protectionism in the region. Grounded on a few criterion to establish potential protectionism, the paper forwards the plausibility of “hidden” barriers in the standard-like NTMs in ASEAN, by drawing upon related secondary data and specific illustrative cases of “harmful” (discriminatory) and burdensome NTMs in the region. From the narrative experiences of ASEAN, it is inferred that procedural obstacles directly associated with a reported standard-like NTM, instead of the NTM itself, largely account for the “hidden” barriers in ASEAN. The paper concludes that irrespective of the motivation for the barriers, whether unintentional or intentional with a protectionist agenda, procedural obstacles deserve attention in their own right.
{"title":"Evolution of ASEAN's New Protectionism","authors":"E. Devadason","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3197831","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3197831","url":null,"abstract":"The 21st century suggests a somewhat vexing scenario of ‘new protectionism’, especially with the rise of protectionist non-tariff measures or NTMs. This largely refers to standard-like NTMs (sanitary and phytosanitary measures and technical barriers to trade, known as SPS and TBTs, respectively) with a dual purpose of non-trade policy objectives and (hidden/ concealed) protectionism. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) are found to be high users of standard-like NTMs relative to other traditional measures to regulate trade. This begs the question if there has been an intentional shift towards murky protectionism in the region. Grounded on a few criterion to establish potential protectionism, the paper forwards the plausibility of “hidden” barriers in the standard-like NTMs in ASEAN, by drawing upon related secondary data and specific illustrative cases of “harmful” (discriminatory) and burdensome NTMs in the region. From the narrative experiences of ASEAN, it is inferred that procedural obstacles directly associated with a reported standard-like NTM, instead of the NTM itself, largely account for the “hidden” barriers in ASEAN. The paper concludes that irrespective of the motivation for the barriers, whether unintentional or intentional with a protectionist agenda, procedural obstacles deserve attention in their own right.","PeriodicalId":197385,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Import/Export Strategies (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115462147","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
G. Balandina, Yuriy Ponomarev, Sergei Germanovich Sinelnikov-Murylev, Andrey V. Tochin
Modern customs administration in Russia in comparison with the best world practices provides insufficient efficiency both for the state and for participants in foreign economic activity. The level of unreliable declaring by the business or importing goods into the country bypassing the established rules remains high. This leads to such negative consequences as unfair competition, evasion from payment of internal taxes, escalation of shadow turnover. The discretionary powers of customs authorities and their officials with existing control technologies (the multiplicity of supervisory bodies and the lack of necessary interaction between them) create conditions for administrative pressure on the business that promotes corruption.
{"title":"Таможенное Администрирование в Росссии: Что Делать? (Customs Administration in Russia: What to Do?)","authors":"G. Balandina, Yuriy Ponomarev, Sergei Germanovich Sinelnikov-Murylev, Andrey V. Tochin","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3202824","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3202824","url":null,"abstract":"Modern customs administration in Russia in comparison with the best world practices provides insufficient efficiency both for the state and for participants in foreign economic activity. The level of unreliable declaring by the business or importing goods into the country bypassing the established rules remains high. This leads to such negative consequences as unfair competition, evasion from payment of internal taxes, escalation of shadow turnover. The discretionary powers of customs authorities and their officials with existing control technologies (the multiplicity of supervisory bodies and the lack of necessary interaction between them) create conditions for administrative pressure on the business that promotes corruption.","PeriodicalId":197385,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Import/Export Strategies (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126621036","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-05-23DOI: 10.11575/SPPP.V11I0.43469
Eugene Beaulieu
Canada is now getting a good look at just how aggressively protectionist the Trump administration in the U.S. is ready to act. It has hit Canadian newsprint exports with punishing tariffs based on unjustified claims that the Canadian industry is both subsidized and dumping product below fair-market value into the U.S. marketplace. This latest trade skirmish, following President Donald Trump’s demands to renegotiate NAFTA, American-instigated trade challenges to Canadian exports of softwood lumber (yet again) and Bombardier aircraft, and Washington’s initial threats to levy duty on Canadian aluminum and steel (now on hold), should set off alarm bells beyond the newsprint industry. Canada’s policy-makers and exporters should be on notice that the administration is clearly eager to penalize the exports of an ostensibly free-trade partner based on overwrought claims. While newsprint sales have been declining everywhere, Canadian producers have nevertheless been able to gain a larger share of the shrinking market, having grown from controlling 60 per cent of combined U.S. and Canadian production in 1990 to 69 per cent in 2016, while developing new products and innovating to maintain a sustainable industry. Complaints about subsidies and dumping from U.S. competitors are plainly intended to halt and possibly reverse that trend. But in addition to hurting Canadian paper producers, including 21 mills in Canada and impacting thousands of workers, also punished in the process will be already struggling American newspaper publishers who will have to pay more for newsprint. While the U.S. has longstanding arguments about the market distortion caused by government’s role in Canada’s softwood lumber industry, the justifications it now considers as valid for claims of Canadian subsidization of newsprint are much broader and more creative. They include government programs to help the industry manage pine beetle infestations, provincial school tax-credit programs, local municipal revitalization programs and even the construction and repair of public access roads and bridges. It is hard to see how many of the dozens of programs identified by the Americans as subsidies fit the traditional definition. If these are now considered subsidies, then suffice it to say that there is scarcely a Canadian export that could not be accused of enjoying subsidies and become subject to trade disputes and tariffs. The signals are as unmissable as they are distressing. The U.S. government has begun using new laws that have never been tried and dusting off old laws that have not been used in decades to erect protectionist barriers. There was a 62-per-cent jump in the number of anti-dumping and countervailing-duty investigations initiated in the first year of the Trump administration compared to the previous year. The U.S. is leading the world in enacting discriminatory trade measures and its pace is speeding up. Canada’s government must mobilize to fight off these attacks against the
{"title":"North American Free Trade Under Attack: Newsprint is Just the Tip of the Iceberg","authors":"Eugene Beaulieu","doi":"10.11575/SPPP.V11I0.43469","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11575/SPPP.V11I0.43469","url":null,"abstract":"Canada is now getting a good look at just how aggressively protectionist the Trump administration in the U.S. is ready to act. It has hit Canadian newsprint exports with punishing tariffs based on unjustified claims that the Canadian industry is both subsidized and dumping product below fair-market value into the U.S. marketplace. This latest trade skirmish, following President Donald Trump’s demands to renegotiate NAFTA, American-instigated trade challenges to Canadian exports of softwood lumber (yet again) and Bombardier aircraft, and Washington’s initial threats to levy duty on Canadian aluminum and steel (now on hold), should set off alarm bells beyond the newsprint industry. Canada’s policy-makers and exporters should be on notice that the administration is clearly eager to penalize the exports of an ostensibly free-trade partner based on overwrought claims. While newsprint sales have been declining everywhere, Canadian producers have nevertheless been able to gain a larger share of the shrinking market, having grown from controlling 60 per cent of combined U.S. and Canadian production in 1990 to 69 per cent in 2016, while developing new products and innovating to maintain a sustainable industry. Complaints about subsidies and dumping from U.S. competitors are plainly intended to halt and possibly reverse that trend. But in addition to hurting Canadian paper producers, including 21 mills in Canada and impacting thousands of workers, also punished in the process will be already struggling American newspaper publishers who will have to pay more for newsprint. While the U.S. has longstanding arguments about the market distortion caused by government’s role in Canada’s softwood lumber industry, the justifications it now considers as valid for claims of Canadian subsidization of newsprint are much broader and more creative. They include government programs to help the industry manage pine beetle infestations, provincial school tax-credit programs, local municipal revitalization programs and even the construction and repair of public access roads and bridges. It is hard to see how many of the dozens of programs identified by the Americans as subsidies fit the traditional definition. If these are now considered subsidies, then suffice it to say that there is scarcely a Canadian export that could not be accused of enjoying subsidies and become subject to trade disputes and tariffs. The signals are as unmissable as they are distressing. The U.S. government has begun using new laws that have never been tried and dusting off old laws that have not been used in decades to erect protectionist barriers. There was a 62-per-cent jump in the number of anti-dumping and countervailing-duty investigations initiated in the first year of the Trump administration compared to the previous year. The U.S. is leading the world in enacting discriminatory trade measures and its pace is speeding up. Canada’s government must mobilize to fight off these attacks against the","PeriodicalId":197385,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Import/Export Strategies (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125820552","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Producers that use imported intermediate goods tend to be much larger and more productive than others. Some of this is due to a selection effect: the most productive producers self‐select into importing because only they can overcome the fixed costs of developing trade relationships with foreign input suppliers. Some of this is due to a technology effect: any given producer would have higher variable profits from operating the technology using imported intermediate goods. To account for the roles of these theoretical mechanisms, we develop a simple model of a competitive small open economy in which heterogeneous firms endogenously decide whether to use imported intermediate goods. The technology that uses imported intermediate goods is superior but requires a higher fixed cost of operating. The calibrated model captures the large performance advantage of importers and quantifies the selection and technology effects.
{"title":"Using Imported Intermediate Goods: Selection and Technology Effects","authors":"M. Gibson, Tim A. Graciano","doi":"10.1111/roie.12325","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/roie.12325","url":null,"abstract":"Producers that use imported intermediate goods tend to be much larger and more productive than others. Some of this is due to a selection effect: the most productive producers self‐select into importing because only they can overcome the fixed costs of developing trade relationships with foreign input suppliers. Some of this is due to a technology effect: any given producer would have higher variable profits from operating the technology using imported intermediate goods. To account for the roles of these theoretical mechanisms, we develop a simple model of a competitive small open economy in which heterogeneous firms endogenously decide whether to use imported intermediate goods. The technology that uses imported intermediate goods is superior but requires a higher fixed cost of operating. The calibrated model captures the large performance advantage of importers and quantifies the selection and technology effects.","PeriodicalId":197385,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Import/Export Strategies (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122640581","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article considers a model of international trade in which the number of produced commodities does not exceed the number of countries engaged in trade. Technology is modeled such that each commodity can be produced in each country from a finite series of dated labor inputs. The existence of a positive rate of profits may lead a country to specialize differently than how it would with a zero rate of profits. Trade may leave consumers in a country worse off, as compared with autarky, when the rate of profits is positive. The existence of more than two countries provides a possibility that the Production Possibilities Frontier (PPF) with trade is neither unambiguously above or below the PPF under autarky. This article re-iterates, in a setting with more than two produced commodities and more than two countries, demonstrations that the argument for free trade is logically invalid, given positive rates of profits.
{"title":"On the Gain and Loss from Trade","authors":"R. Vienneau","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3167270","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3167270","url":null,"abstract":"This article considers a model of international trade in which the number of produced commodities does not exceed the number of countries engaged in trade. Technology is modeled such that each commodity can be produced in each country from a finite series of dated labor inputs. The existence of a positive rate of profits may lead a country to specialize differently than how it would with a zero rate of profits. Trade may leave consumers in a country worse off, as compared with autarky, when the rate of profits is positive. The existence of more than two countries provides a possibility that the Production Possibilities Frontier (PPF) with trade is neither unambiguously above or below the PPF under autarky. This article re-iterates, in a setting with more than two produced commodities and more than two countries, demonstrations that the argument for free trade is logically invalid, given positive rates of profits.","PeriodicalId":197385,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Import/Export Strategies (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121143705","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-04-01DOI: 10.5089/9781484351017.001
Arnold M. McIntyre, Mike Xin Li, Ke Wang, Hanlei Yun
The paper considers concepts of economic diversification with respect to exports (including service sectors) for small states. We assessed the economic performance of different groups of 34 small states over the period of 1990-2015 and found those more diversified experienced lower output volatility and higher average growth than most other small states. Our findings are consistent with conventional economic theories but we found that export diversification has a more significant impact on reducing output volatility than improving long run growth in small states. Diversification requires fundamental changes and should be contemplated in the context of a cohesive development strategy.
{"title":"Economic Benefits of Export Diversification in Small States","authors":"Arnold M. McIntyre, Mike Xin Li, Ke Wang, Hanlei Yun","doi":"10.5089/9781484351017.001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5089/9781484351017.001","url":null,"abstract":"The paper considers concepts of economic diversification with respect to exports (including service sectors) for small states. We assessed the economic performance of different groups of 34 small states over the period of 1990-2015 and found those more diversified experienced lower output volatility and higher average growth than most other small states. Our findings are consistent with conventional economic theories but we found that export diversification has a more significant impact on reducing output volatility than improving long run growth in small states. Diversification requires fundamental changes and should be contemplated in the context of a cohesive development strategy.","PeriodicalId":197385,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Import/Export Strategies (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132944337","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：