Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

International trade and competitiveness

Contents:

Author Info

  • Armando Garcia Pires

    ()

Abstract

We analyze the role of international market size differences in determining the investment in process R&D (and thus firms’ competitiveness) in a trade model with oligopolistic market structure, non-homothetic production technology and costly trade. We show that the R&D effort is higher (or even disproportionately so) for firms in the larger market, which causes endogenous asymmetries across countries. As a result, firms in the larger market have higher competitiveness, which increases their market shares in international markets. Furthermore, and contrary to what is predicted by Krugman (Am Econ Rev 70:950–959, 1980 ) “home market effect”, in equilibrium the larger country does not need to host a disproportionately higher share of the world’s industry than of the world’s demand. Despite this, the larger country can still continue to run a trade surplus in the oligopolistic sector, since it hosts firms with higher competitiveness than firms in the smaller country. Copyright Springer-Verlag 2012

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s00199-010-0586-2
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Springer in its journal Economic Theory.

Volume (Year): 50 (2012)
Issue (Month): 3 (August)
Pages: 727-763

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:spr:joecth:v:50:y:2012:i:3:p:727-763

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00199/index.htm

Order Information:
Web: http://link.springer.de/orders.htm

Related research

Keywords: Endogenous asymmetric firms; Competitiveness; R&D investment; International trade; Home market effect; Oligopoly; F12; L13; O31;

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Donald R. Davis & David E. Weinstein, 1996. "Does Economic Geography Matter for International Specialization?," NBER Working Papers 5706, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  2. Omar Licandro & Antonio Navas-Ruiz, 2007. "Trade Liberalization, Competition And Growth," Working Papers halshs-00354236, HAL.
  3. Marc J. Melitz & Gianmarco I.P. Ottaviano, 2005. "Market Size, Trade, and Productivity," Development Working Papers 201, Centro Studi Luca d\'Agliano, University of Milano.
  4. Hummels, David & Levinsohn, James, 1995. "Monopolistic Competition and International Trade: Reconsidering the Evidence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 110(3), pages 799-836, August.
  5. James A. Brander & Paul Krugman, 1983. "A 'Reciprocal Dumping' Model of International Trade," NBER Working Papers 1194, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  6. Bee Yan Aw & Mark J. Roberts & Daniel Yi Xu, 2008. "R&D Investments, Exporting, and the Evolution of Firm Productivity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(2), pages 451-56, May.
  7. Davis, Donald R, 1998. "The Home Market, Trade, and Industrial Structure," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1264-76, December.
  8. Stefan Lachenmaier & Ludger Wö�mann, 2006. "Does innovation cause exports? Evidence from exogenous innovation impulses and obstacles using German micro data," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 58(2), pages 317-350, April.
  9. Keith Head & Thierry Mayer & John Ries, 2002. "On the pervasiveness of home market effects," Sciences Po publications info:hdl:2441/c8dmi8nm4pd, Sciences Po.
  10. Mark J. Melitz, 2002. "The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity," NBER Working Papers 8881, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  11. Eric W. Bond & Kazumichi Iwasa & Kazuo Nishimura, 2009. "A Dynamic Two Country Heckscher-Ohlin Model with Non-Homothetic Preferences," KIER Working Papers 686, Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research.
  12. Peter Neary & Dermot Leahy, 2007. "Multilateral Subsidy Games," Economics Series Working Papers 346, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
  13. Krugman, Paul, 1991. "Increasing Returns and Economic Geography," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(3), pages 483-99, June.
  14. Wakelin, Katharine, 1998. "Innovation and export behaviour at the firm level," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(7-8), pages 829-841, April.
  15. Alireza Naghavi & Gianmarco Ottaviano, 2009. "Offshoring and product innovation," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 517-532, March.
  16. Martin, Philippe & Rogers, Carol Ann, 1995. "Industrial location and public infrastructure," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3-4), pages 335-351, November.
  17. Gustavsson, Patrik & Hansson, Par & Lundberg, Lars, 1999. "Technology, resource endowments and international competitiveness," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1501-1530, August.
  18. Jan Fagerberg, 1995. "Is there a large-country advantage in high-tech?," Working Papers Archives 1995526, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
  19. Werner Antweiler & Daniel Trefler, 2002. "Increasing Returns and All That: A View from Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 93-119, March.
  20. Krugman, Paul, 1980. "Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the Pattern of Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 950-59, December.
  21. Andrew B. Bernard & Jonathan Eaton & J. Bradford Jensen & Samuel Kortum, 2000. "Plants and Productivity in International Trade," Boston University - Institute for Economic Development 105, Boston University, Institute for Economic Development.
  22. Roper, Stephen & Love, James H., 2002. "Innovation and export performance: evidence from the UK and German manufacturing plants," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(7), pages 1087-1102, September.
  23. Raphael Bergoeing & Timothy J. Kehoe, 2001. "Trade Theory and Trade Facts," Documentos de Trabajo 109, Centro de Economía Aplicada, Universidad de Chile.
  24. Roberts, Mark J & Tybout, James R, 1997. "The Decision to Export in Colombia: An Empirical Model of Entry with Sunk Costs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(4), pages 545-64, September.
  25. Xavier Vives, 2001. "Oligopoly Pricing: Old Ideas and New Tools," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 026272040x, December.
  26. Davis, Donald R. & Weinstein, David E., 1999. "Economic geography and regional production structure: An empirical investigation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 379-407, February.
  27. Andrew B. Bernard & J. Bradford Jensen, 1997. "Exceptional Exporter Performance: Cause, Effect, or Both?," NBER Working Papers 6272, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  28. Fudenberg, Drew & Tirole, Jean, 1984. "The Fat-Cat Effect, the Puppy-Dog Ploy, and the Lean and Hungry Look," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(2), pages 361-66, May.
  29. Jonathan Eaton & Samuel Kortum, 2002. "Technology, Geography, and Trade," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(5), pages 1741-1779, September.
  30. Brander, James A., 1981. "Intra-industry trade in identical commodities," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 1-14, February.
  31. Haiwen Zhou, 2004. "The division of labor and the extent of the market," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 195-209, 07.
  32. Emmanuel Petrakis & Minas Vlassis, 2004. "Endogenous wage bargaining institutions in oligopolistic sectors," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 55-73, 07.
  33. Fagerberg, Jan, 1988. "International Competitiveness: Errata," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(393), pages 1203, December.
  34. Harrigan, James, 1996. "Openness to trade in manufactures in the OECD," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1-2), pages 23-39, February.
  35. Michael Fung, 2002. "Technological Opportunity and Economies of Scale in Research Productivity: A Study on Three Global Industries," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 419-436, December.
  36. Bee Yan Aw & Mark J. Roberts & Daniel Yi Xu, 2011. "R&D Investment, Exporting, and Productivity Dynamics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1312-44, June.
  37. Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1991. "Game Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262061414, December.
  38. Fagerberg, Jan, 1988. "International Competitiveness," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(391), pages 355-74, June.
  39. Lawrence, Colin & Spiller, Pablo T, 1983. "Product Diversity, Economies of Scale, and International Trade," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 98(1), pages 63-83, February.
  40. Edwin Lai & Raymond Riezman & Ping Wang, 2009. "Outsourcing of innovation," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 485-515, March.
  41. Helpman, Elhanan, 1987. "Imperfect competition and international trade: Evidence from fourteen industrial countries," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 62-81, March.
  42. Johan Torstensson, 1998. "Country size and comparative advantage: An empirical study," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, vol. 134(4), pages 590-611, December.
  43. Lundberg, Lars, 1988. " Technology, Factor Proportions and Competitiveness," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 90(2), pages 173-88.
  44. Keith Head & John Ries, 2001. "Increasing Returns versus National Product Differentiation as an Explanation for the Pattern of U.S.-Canada Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 858-876, September.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Chia Chiun Ko & Paul Frijters, 2014. "When Banana Import Restrictions Lead to Exports: A Tale of Cyclones and Quarantine Policies," Discussion Papers Series 502, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:joecth:v:50:y:2012:i:3:p:727-763. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F Baum).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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