IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cje/issued/v52y2019i4p1464-1496.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Protection for maturing industries: Evidence from Canadian trade patterns and trade policy, 18701913

Author

Listed:
  • Ian Keay

Abstract

As industries mature, experience is accumulated, productivity increases, trade performance improves on domestic and international markets and learning potential dissipates. Using theory-consistent empirical specifications, I find a strong, robust negative relationship linking tariff rates to trade performance for manufactured products that matured during the first decade after Canada prioritized protectionist policy objectives in 1879. This relationship also holds at a more aggregate industry level, where I can use other measures of maturity, control for import penetration, use historically contemporaneous trade elasticity estimates, link trade performance to trade restrictiveness and effective rates of protection and where I can instrument for import penetration and trade performance using a two-stage IVGMM estimation approach. The results suggest that after 1890 the Canadian government carefully cut tariffs on products produced by maturing Canadian producers and this retreat from protectionism significantly lowered the static deadweight losses resulting from Canadian trade policy during the post-1890 period.

Suggested Citation

  • Ian Keay, 2019. "Protection for maturing industries: Evidence from Canadian trade patterns and trade policy, 18701913," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 52(4), pages 1464-1496, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:cje:issued:v:52:y:2019:i:4:p:1464-1496
    DOI: 10.1111/caje.12410
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/caje.12410
    Download Restriction: access restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/caje.12410?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard E. Caves, 1976. "Economic Models of Political Choice: Canada's Tariff Structure," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 9(2), pages 278-300, May.
    2. Eugene Beaulieu & Jevan Cherniwchan, 2014. "Tariff Structure, Trade Expansion, and Canadian Protectionism, 1870–1910," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(1), pages 144-172, February.
    3. Mill, John Stuart, 1848. "Principles of Political Economy (II): Distribution," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, volume 2, number mill1848-2.
    4. Fernandes, Ana M., 2007. "Trade policy, trade volumes and plant-level productivity in Colombian manufacturing industries," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 52-71, March.
    5. Hiau Looi Kee & Alessandro Nicita & Marcelo Olarreaga, 2008. "Import Demand Elasticities and Trade Distortions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 90(4), pages 666-682, November.
    6. Baybars Karacaovali, 2011. "Productivity Matters For Trade Policy: Theory And Evidence," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 52(1), pages 33-62, February.
    7. Douglas A. Irwin, 2010. "Trade Restrictiveness and Deadweight Losses from US Tariffs," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 2(3), pages 111-133, August.
    8. Mill, John Stuart, 1848. "Principles of Political Economy (III): Exchange," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, volume 3, number mill1848-3.
    9. Antoni Estevadeordal & Brian Frantz & Alan M. Taylor, 2003. "The Rise and Fall of World Trade, 1870–1939," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(2), pages 359-407.
    10. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1994. "Protection for Sale," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 833-850, September.
    11. Beaulieu, Eugene & Emery, J. C. Herbert, 2001. "Pork Packers, Reciprocity, And Laurier'S Defeat In The 1911 Canadian General Election," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 61(4), pages 1083-1101, December.
    12. Federico, Giovanni & Vasta, Michelangelo, 2015. "What Do We Really Know about Protection before the Great Depression: Evidence from Italy," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 75(4), pages 993-1029, December.
    13. Irwin, Douglas A., 2000. "Did Late-Nineteenth-Century U.S. Tariffs Promote Infant Industries? Evidence from the Tinplate Industry," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 60(2), pages 335-360, June.
    14. Mill, John Stuart, 1848. "Principles of Political Economy (I): Production," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, volume 1, number mill1848-1.
    15. Head, Keith, 1994. "Infant industry protection in the steel rail industry," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3-4), pages 141-165, November.
    16. Tovar, Patricia, 2009. "The effects of loss aversion on trade policy: Theory and evidence," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 154-167, June.
    17. Harris, Richard & Keay, Ian & Lewis, Frank, 2015. "Protecting infant industries: Canadian manufacturing and the national policy, 1870–1913," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 15-31.
    18. Kris Inwood & Ian Keay, 2013. "Trade policy and industrial development: iron and steel in a small open economy, 18701913," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 46(4), pages 1265-1294, November.
    19. Melitz, Marc J., 2005. "When and how should infant industries be protected?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 177-196, May.
    20. Kris James Mitchener & Se Yan, 2014. "Globalization, Trade, And Wages: What Does History Tell Us About China?," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 55, pages 131-168, February.
    21. Alexander, Patrick D. & Keay, Ian, 2018. "A general equilibrium analysis of Canada’s national policy," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 1-15.
    22. Mill, John Stuart, 1848. "Principles of Political Economy (V): On the Influence of Government," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, volume 5, number mill1848-5.
    23. Joseph H. Davis, 2004. "An Annual Index of U. S. Industrial Production, 1790–1915," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(4), pages 1177-1215.
    24. Easton, Stephen T. & Gibson, William A. & Reed, Clyde G., 1988. "Tariffs and growth: The dales hypothesis," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 147-163, April.
    25. G. K. Helleiner, 1977. "The Political Economy of Canada's Tariff Structure: An Alternative Model," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 10(2), pages 318-326, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Patrick Alexander & Ian Keay, 2018. "Responding to the First Era of Globalization: Canadian Trade Policy, 1870–1913," Staff Working Papers 18-42, Bank of Canada.
    2. Ian Keay & Brian D. Varian, 2024. "The impact of preferential market access: British imports into Canada, 1892–1903," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 57(1), pages 140-164, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Patrick Alexander & Ian Keay, 2018. "Responding to the First Era of Globalization: Canadian Trade Policy, 1870–1913," Staff Working Papers 18-42, Bank of Canada.
    2. Harris, Richard & Keay, Ian & Lewis, Frank, 2015. "Protecting infant industries: Canadian manufacturing and the national policy, 1870–1913," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 15-31.
    3. Alexander, Patrick D. & Keay, Ian, 2018. "A general equilibrium analysis of Canada’s national policy," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 1-15.
    4. B. Ravikumar & Raymond Riezman & Yuzhe Zhang, 2022. "Private Information and Optimal Infant Industry Protection," Working Papers 2022-013, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
    5. Melitz, Marc J., 2005. "When and how should infant industries be protected?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 177-196, May.
    6. Wu, Yiyun & Zhu, Xiwei & Groenewold, Nicolaas, 2019. "The determinants and effectiveness of industrial policy in china: A study based on Five-Year Plans," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 225-242.
    7. Baybars Karacaovali, 2011. "Productivity Matters For Trade Policy: Theory And Evidence," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 52(1), pages 33-62, February.
    8. Nathaniel Lane, 2020. "The New Empirics of Industrial Policy," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 209-234, June.
    9. Lane, Nathaniel, 2016. "Manufacturing Revolutions: Industrial Policy and Industrialization in South Korea," SocArXiv 6tqax, Center for Open Science.
    10. Patrick Alexander & Ian Keay, 2017. "The Welfare Effects of Protection: A General Equilibrium Analysis of Canada’s National Policy," Staff Working Papers 17-18, Bank of Canada.
    11. Gillian C. Hamilton & Ian Keay & Frank D. Lewis, 2017. "Contributions to Canadian economic history: The last 30 years," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(5), pages 1632-1657, December.
    12. Cao, Zhiyan & Fernando, Guy D. & Tripathy, Arindam & Upadhyay, Arun, 2018. "The economics of corporate lobbying," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 54-80.
    13. Jacobsen, Catrine & Piovesan, Marco, 2016. "Tax me if you can: An artifactual field experiment on dishonesty," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 7-14.
    14. Martimort, David, 1996. "The multiprincipal nature of government," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(3-5), pages 673-685, April.
    15. Meissner, Christopher M., 2014. "Growth from Globalization? A View from the Very Long Run," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 8, pages 1033-1069, Elsevier.
    16. Wurm, Laura, 2021. "Strangling speculation: The effect of the 1903 Viennese futures trading ban," QUCEH Working Paper Series 21-09, Queen's University Belfast, Queen's University Centre for Economic History.
    17. Tsoulfidis, Lefteris & Alexiou, Constantinos & Parthenidis, Thanasis, 2015. "Revisiting profit persistence and the stock market in Japan," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 10-24.
    18. Ian Moffatt, 2013. "Measuring sustainable development," Chapters, in: M. A. Quaddus & M. A.B. Siddique (ed.), Handbook of Sustainable Development Planning, chapter 3, pages 39-60, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Hassan Benchekroun & Ngo Long, 2018. "Nurturing an Infant Industry by Markovian Subsidy Schemes," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 519-541, September.
    20. Simone Pellegrino & Guido Perboli & Giovanni Squillero, 2019. "Balancing the equity-efficiency trade-off in personal income taxation: an evolutionary approach," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 36(1), pages 37-64, April.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • N71 - Economic History - - Economic History: Transport, International and Domestic Trade, Energy, and Other Services - - - U.S.; Canada: Pre-1913

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cje:issued:v:52:y:2019:i:4:p:1464-1496. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Prof. Werner Antweiler (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ceaaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.