IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iaae94/183397.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Technological Progress and International Trade: The Case of the Less Developed ASEAN Countries

Author

Listed:
  • Reed, Michael
  • Salvacruz, Joseph

Abstract

Many trade economists believe that the introduction of technical change into an otherwise Heckscher-Ohlin (H-0) model could result in a more comprehensive explanation of trade flows. However, most of the investigations of this hypothesis have been based on the limiting assumption that technology is exogenously determined, and have narrowly focused on the manufacturing sector. In addition, most works on technology-based trade have dealt exclusively with the United States, which is a significant drawback in testing theories which seem to have originated with American observations in the first place (Deardoff, 1985). This study aims to fill part of this gap by analysing the relationship between endogenous technology and international trade of the less developed countries of Southeast Asia. It tests the significance of a technology-trade relationship in both the agricultural and the agribased manufacturing sectors of their economies. Since Asia is considered to be the most dynamic region of the world in terms of economic growth and development, it is appropriate that this investigation be conducted on an area where 'newly industrializing economies' have originated and will continue to do so.

Suggested Citation

  • Reed, Michael & Salvacruz, Joseph, 1995. "Technological Progress and International Trade: The Case of the Less Developed ASEAN Countries," 1994 Conference, August 22-29, 1994, Harare, Zimbabwe 183397, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae94:183397
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.183397
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/183397/files/IAAE-CONF-395.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.183397?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arnade, Carlos Anthony, 1994. "Testing two trade models in Latin American agriculture," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 10(1), pages 49-59, January.
    2. M. V. Posner, 1961. "International Trade And Technical Change," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(3), pages 323-341.
    3. Kamien,Morton I. & Schwartz,Nancy L., 1982. "Market Structure and Innovation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521293853, December.
    4. Ball, V. Eldon, 1984. "Measuring Agricultural Productivity: A New Look," Staff Reports 277585, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    5. N/A, 1963. "The Plastics Industry: a Comparative Study of Research and Innovation," National Institute Economic Review, National Institute of Economic and Social Research, vol. 26(1), pages 22-49, November.
    6. Krugman, Paul, 1979. "A Model of Innovation, Technology Transfer, and the World Distribution of Income," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 87(2), pages 253-266, April.
    7. Richard Jensen & Marie Thursby, 1987. "A Decision Theoretic Model of Innovation, Technology Transfer, and Trade," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 54(4), pages 631-647.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Salvacruz, Joseph C., 1994. "Technological Change And Agricultural Trade Patterns," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 25(1), pages 1-6, February.
    2. repec:ilo:ilowps:271281 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Harris, R. G., 1989. "New theories of trade and the pattern of global specialisation," ILO Working Papers 992712813402676, International Labour Organization.
    4. Bos, Jaap W.B. & Kolari, James W. & van Lamoen, Ryan C.R., 2013. "Competition and innovation: Evidence from financial services," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 1590-1601.
    5. Fritsch, Winston & Franco, Gustavo H.B., 1991. "Competition and Industrial policies in a technologically dependent economy: the emerging issues for Brazil," Revista Brasileira de Economia - RBE, EPGE Brazilian School of Economics and Finance - FGV EPGE (Brazil), vol. 45(1), January.
    6. Richard Harris & John Moffat, 2011. "R&D, Innovation and Exporting," SERC Discussion Papers 0073, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    7. Lin, Hwan C., 2010. "Technology diffusion and global welfare effects: Imitative R&D vs. South-bound FDI," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 231-247, November.
    8. Christoph March & Ina Schieferdecker, 2021. "Technological Sovereignty as Ability, Not Autarky," CESifo Working Paper Series 9139, CESifo.
    9. Fagerberg, Jan, 1987. "A technology gap approach to why growth rates differ," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(2-4), pages 87-99, August.
    10. Pol Antràs, 2005. "Incomplete Contracts and the Product Cycle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1054-1073, September.
    11. Tavassoli, Sam, 2013. "The Role of Product Innovation Output on Export Behavior of Firms," Papers in Innovation Studies 2013/38, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    12. Lu, Chia-Hui, 2007. "Moving up or moving out? A unified theory of R&D, FDI, and trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 324-343, April.
    13. Christopher F. Baum & Mustafa Caglayan & Oleksandr Talavera, 2016. "R&D Expenditures and Geographical Sales Diversification," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 84(2), pages 197-221, March.
    14. Ginchev Ivan & Guerraggio Angelo & Rocca Matteo, 2002. "On second-order conditions in vector optimization," Economics and Quantitative Methods qf0218, Department of Economics, University of Insubria.
    15. Joseph E. Gagnon & Andrew K. Rose, 1991. "How pervasive is the product cycle? The empirical dynamics of American and Japanese trade flows," International Finance Discussion Papers 410, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    16. Petr Hanel & Sofiene Zorgati, 2000. "Technology Spillovers and Trade:Empirical Evidence for the G7 Industrial Countries," Cahiers de recherche 00-07, Departement d'économique de l'École de gestion à l'Université de Sherbrooke.
    17. Rammer, Christian & Köhler, Christian & Murmann, Martin & Pesau, Agnes & Schwiebacher, Franz & Kinkel, Steffen & Kirner, Eva & Schubert, Torben & Som, Oliver, 2010. "Innovationen ohne Forschung und Entwicklung: Eine Untersuchung zu Unternehmen, die ohne eigene FuE-Tätigkeit neue Produkte und Prozesse einführen," Studien zum deutschen Innovationssystem 15-2011, Expertenkommission Forschung und Innovation (EFI) - Commission of Experts for Research and Innovation, Berlin.
    18. Abdul Rauf & Ying Ma & Abdul Jalil, 2019. "Revisiting the Innovation-export Nexus using Industry-level Data: Evidence from China's Large- and Medium-sized Industrial Enterprises," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 9(3), pages 73-80.
    19. Fagerberg, Jan & Fosaas, Morten & Bell, Martin & Martin, Ben R., 2011. "Christopher Freeman: social science entrepreneur," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(7), pages 897-916, September.
    20. Lee, Seong-Hoon & Goo, Young-Wan, 2008. "Endogenous Income Distribution with Product Obsolescence," Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 49(2), pages 75-90, December.
    21. Yusuf Bayraktutan & Hanife Bıdırdı, 2018. "Innovation and High-Tech Exports in Developed and Developing Countries," Journal of International Commerce, Economics and Policy (JICEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 9(03), pages 1-21, October.

    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:ags:iaae94:183397. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.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.