Posted Content•
Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the Pattern of Trade
01 Jan 2016-The American Economic Review (American Economic Association)-Vol. 70, Iss: 5, pp 950-959
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a simple formal analysis which incorporates these elements, and show how it can be used to shed some light on some issues which cannot be handled in more conventional models.
Abstract: For some time now there has been considerable skepticism about the ability of comparative cost theory to explain the actual pattern of international trade. Neither the extensive trade among the industrial countries, nor the prevalence in this trade of two-way exchanges of differentiated products, make much sense in terms of standard theory. As a result, many people have concluded that a new framework for analyzing trade is needed.' The main elements of such a framework-economies of scale, the possibility of product differentiation, and imperfect competition-have been discussed by such authors as Bela Balassa, Herbert Grubel (1967,1970), and Irving Kravis, and have been "in the air" for many years. In this paper I present a simple formal analysis which incorporates these elements, and show how it can be used to shed some light on some issues which cannot be handled in more conventional models. These include, in particular, the causes of trade between economies with similar factor endowments, and the role of a large domestic market in encouraging exports. The basic model of this paper is one in which there are economies of scale in production and firms can costlessly differentiate their products. In this model, which is derived from recent work by Avinash Dixit and Joseph Stiglitz, equilibrium takes the form of Chamberlinian monopolistic competition: each firm has some monopoly power, but entry drives monopoly profits to zero. When two imperfectly competitive economies of this kind are allowed to trade, increasing returns produce trade and gains from trade even if the economies have identical tastes, technology, and factor endowments. This basic model of trade is presented in Section I. It is closely related to a model I have developed elsewhere; in this paper a somewhat more restrictive formulation of demand is used to make the analysis in later sections easier. The rest of the paper is concerned with two extensions of the basic model. In Section II, I examine the effect of transportation costs, and show that countries with larger domestic markets will, other things equal, have higher wage rates. Section III then deals with "home market" effects on trade patterns. It provides a formal justification for the commonly made argument that countries will tend to export those goods for which they have relatively large domestic markets. This paper makes no pretense of generality. The models presented rely on extremely restrictive assumptions about cost and utility. Nonetheless, it is to be hoped that the paper provides some useful insights into those aspects of international trade which simply cannot be treated in our usual models.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: This paper developed a dynamic industry model with heterogeneous firms to analyze the intra-industry effects of international trade and showed how the exposure to trade will induce only the more productive firms to enter the export market (while some less productive firms continue to produce only for the domestic market).
Abstract: This paper develops a dynamic industry model with heterogeneous firms to analyze the intra-industry effects of international trade. The model shows how the exposure to trade will induce only the more productive firms to enter the export market (while some less productive firms continue to produce only for the domestic market) and will simultaneously force the least productive firms to exit. It then shows how further increases in the industry's exposure to trade lead to additional inter-firm reallocations towards more productive firms. The paper also shows how the aggregate industry productivity growth generated by the reallocations contributes to a welfare gain, thus highlighting a benefit from trade that has not been examined theoretically before. The paper adapts Hopenhayn's (1992a) dynamic industry model to monopolistic competition in a general equilibrium setting. In so doing, the paper provides an extension of Krugman's (1980) trade model that incorporates firm level productivity differences. Firms with different productivity levels coexist in an industry because each firm faces initial uncertainty concerning its productivity before making an irreversible investment to enter the industry. Entry into the export market is also costly, but the firm's decision to export occurs after it gains knowledge of its productivity.
9,036 citations
TL;DR: This paper developed a simple model that shows how a country can endogenously become differentiated into an industrialized core and an agricultural periphery, in which manufacturing firms tend to locate in the region with larger demand, but the location of demand itself depends on the distribution of manufacturing.
Abstract: This paper develops a simple model that shows how a country can endogenously become differentiated into an industrialized "core" and an agricultural "periphery." In order to realize scale economies while minimizing transport costs, manufacturing firms tend to locate in the region with larger demand, but the location of demand itself depends on the distribution of manufacturing. Emergence of a core-periphery pattern depends on transportation costs, economies of scale, and the share of manufacturing in national income. The study of economic geography-of the location of factors of production in space-occupies a relatively small part of standard economic analysis. International trade theory, in particular, conventionally treats nations as dimensionless points (and frequently assumes zero transportation costs between countries as well). Admittedly, models descended from von Thunen (1826) play an important role in urban studies, while Hotelling-type models of locational competition get a reasonable degree of attention in industrial organization. On the whole, however, it seems fair to say that the study of economic geography plays at best a marginal role in economic theory. On the face of it, this neglect is surprising. The facts of economic geography are surely among the most striking features of real-world economies, at least to laymen. For example, one of the most remarkable things about the United States is that in a generally sparsely populated country, much of whose land is fertile, the bulk of the population resides in a few clusters of metropolitan areas; a quarter of the inhabitants are crowded into a not especially inviting section of the East Coast. It has often been noted that nighttime satellite
7,730 citations
Posted Content•
TL;DR: In this paper, a dynamic industry model with heterogeneous firms is proposed to explain why international trade induces reallocations of resources among firms in an industry and contributes to a welfare gain.
Abstract: This Paper builds a dynamic industry model with heterogeneous firms that explains why international trade induces reallocations of resources among firms in an industry. The Paper shows how the exposure to trade will induce only the more productive firms to enter the export market (while some less productive firms continue to produce only for the domestic market) and will simultaneously force the least productive firms to exit. It then shows how further increases in the industry's exposure to trade lead to additional inter-firm reallocations towards more productive firms. These phenomena have been empirically documented but cannot be explained by current general equilibrium trade models, because they rely on a representative firm framework. The Paper also shows how the aggregate industry productivity growth generated by the reallocations contributes to a welfare gain, thus highlighting a benefit from trade that has not been examined theoretically before. The Paper adapts Hopenhayn's (1992a) dynamic industry model to monopolistic competition in a general equilibrium setting. In so doing, the Paper provides an extension of Krugman's (1980) trade model that incorporates firm level productivity differences. Firms with different productivity levels coexist in an industry because each firm faces initial uncertainty concerning its productivity before making an irreversible investment to enter the industry. Entry into the export market is also costly, but the firm's decision to export occurs after it gains knowledge of its productivity.
5,186 citations
Posted Content•
TL;DR: This paper developed a two-region, two-sector general equilibriun model of location, where the location of agricultural production is fixed, but ionopolistcally competitive manufacturing finns choose their location to maximize profits.
Abstract: This paper develops a two-region, two-sector general equilibriun model of location. The location of agricultural production is fixed, but ionopolistcally competitive manufacturing finns choose their location to maximize profits. If transportation costs are high, returns to scale weak, and the share of spending on manufactured goods low, the incentive to produce close to the market leads to an equal division of manufacturing between the regions. With lower transport costs, stronger scale economies, or a higher manufacturing share, circular causation sets in: the more manufacturing is located in one region, the larger that region's share of demand, and this provides an incentive to locate still more manufacturing there. Thus when the parameters of the economy lie even slightly on one side of a critical "phase boundary", all manufacturing production ends up concentrated in only one region.
2,470 citations
Posted Content•
TL;DR: In this article, the authors develop a monopolistically competitive model of trade with firm heterogeneity in terms of productivity differences and endogenous differences in the "toughness" of competition across markets.
Abstract: We develop a monopolistically competitive model of trade with firm heterogeneity—in terms of productivity differences—and endogenous differences in the "toughness" of competition across markets—in terms of the number and average productivity of competing firms. We analyse how these features vary across markets of different size that are not perfectly integrated through trade; we then study the effects of different trade liberalization policies. In our model, market size and trade affect the toughness of competition, which then feeds back into the selection of heterogeneous producers and exporters in that market. Aggregate productivity and average mark-ups thus respond to both the size of a market and the extent of its integration through trade (larger, more integrated markets exhibit higher productivity and lower mark-ups). Our model remains highly tractable, even when extended to a general framework with multiple asymmetric countries integrated to different extents through asymmetric trade costs. We believe this provides a useful modelling framework that is particularly well suited to the analysis of trade and regional integration policy scenarios in an environment with heterogeneous firms and endogenous mark-ups.
2,259 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: In this article, Pettengill tests whether there is an excessive number of firms in a monopolistically competitive equilibrium by a device of considerable expository merit, and redistributes the resources thus released equally over the remaining firms in the sector, to see if welfare can be improved.
Abstract: Pettengill tests whether there is an excessive number of firms in a monopolistically competitive equilibrium by a device of considerable expository merit. He removes one firm, and redistributes the resources thus released equally over the remaining firms in the sector, to see if welfare can be improved. To do this correctly, we write n, for the equilibrium number of firms and xe for the output of each. With fixed cost a and constant average variable cost c, removing one firm releases (a + Cxe) of resources, and this enables the output of each of the remaining ( I) firms to be increased (a + c Xe )/(1fl 1)}. The quantity xo of the numeraire good is unaffected by this, and the utility function (equation (31) of our paper) is
6,161 citations
TL;DR: The authors developed a simple, general equilibrium model of non-comparative advantage trade and showed that trade and gains from trade will occur, even between countries with identical tastes, technology, and factor endowments.
3,756 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, it was considered that in the European Common Market intra-industry specialization dominated over inter industry specialization and that similar developments were important in the development of Benelux trade.
Abstract: In recent years some economists have suggested that under a wide range of circumstances free international trade will result in a situation where each country simultaneously produces, exports, and imports products which are very close substitutes for each other in consumption, production, or both. Because of the similarity of these products they are commonly accounted for in the same statistical “industry” classification, and the resultant international pattern of production and trade can conveniently be described as “intra-industry specialization” as contrasted with “inter-industry specialization” which results when countries produce and export but do not import the output of some industries while they import but do not produce or export the output of some other industries. It was considered that in the European Common Market intra-industry specialization dominated over inter-industry specialization and that similar developments were important in the development of Benelux trade. At the same time, but independently from these two suggestions in the literature, two pieces of research produced models capable of explaining which country would tend to specialize in which of the different qualities or styles of commodities making up the international trade in products of the same industries.
165 citations
"Scale Economies, Product Differenti..." refers background or result in this paper
...And the implications for the pattern of trade are similar to those suggested by Steffan Linder, Grubel (1970), and others....
[...]
..., Herbert Grubel (1967,1970), and Irving Kravis, and have been "in the air" for many years....
[...]