IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/van/wpaper/vuecon-sub-17-00004.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Trade and growth with heterogeneous firms revisited once again

Author

Listed:
  • Takumi Naito

    (Vanderbilt University and Waseda University)

Abstract

To study the long-run growth and welfare effects of both symmetric and asymmetric trade liberalization, we extend Baldwin and Robert-Nicoud (2008) to allow for asymmetric countries. We obtain four main results. First, the dynamic effect strictly dominates the static effect on expenditure if and only if the knowledge sector is active. Second, under a generalized Coe-Helpman specification, unilateral trade liberalization can raise the balanced growth rate. Third, in the symmetric country case, we derive extended autarkiness ratio formulas for long-run growth and welfare. Fourth, growth-enhancing unilateral trade liberalization is not sufficient for higher long-run welfare for at most one country.

Suggested Citation

  • Takumi Naito, 2017. "Trade and growth with heterogeneous firms revisited once again," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 17-00004, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:van:wpaper:vuecon-sub-17-00004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.accessecon.com/pubs/VUECON/VUECON-17-00004.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jesse Perla & Christopher Tonetti & Michael E. Waugh, 2021. "Equilibrium Technology Diffusion, Trade, and Growth," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(1), pages 73-128, January.
    2. Baldwin, Richard E. & Robert-Nicoud, Frederic, 2008. "Trade and growth with heterogeneous firms," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 21-34, January.
    3. Krugman, Paul, 1980. "Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the Pattern of Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 950-959, December.
    4. Thomas Sampson, 2016. "Dynamic Selection: An Idea Flows Theory of Entry, Trade, and Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 131(1), pages 315-380.
    5. Francisco J. Buera & Ezra Oberfield, 2020. "The Global Diffusion of Ideas," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(1), pages 83-114, January.
    6. Andrew Atkeson & Ariel Tomás Burstein, 2010. "Innovation, Firm Dynamics, and International Trade," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(3), pages 433-484, June.
    7. Costas Arkolakis & Arnaud Costinot & Andres Rodriguez-Clare, 2012. "New Trade Models, Same Old Gains?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(1), pages 94-130, February.
    8. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2004. "Trade Costs," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(3), pages 691-751, September.
    9. Peter Gustafsson & Paul Segerstrom, 2010. "Trade Liberalization and Productivity Growth," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(2), pages 207-228, May.
    10. Ourens, Guzmán, 2016. "Trade and growth with heterogeneous firms revisited," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 194-202.
    11. Marc J. Melitz, 2003. "The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(6), pages 1695-1725, November.
    12. Dinopoulos, Elias & Unel, Bulent, 2011. "Quality heterogeneity and global economic growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(5), pages 595-612, June.
    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. Naito, Takumi, 2019. "A lab-equipment model of growth with heterogeneous firms and asymmetric countries," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 33-36.
    2. Ryoji Ohdoi & Kazuo Mino & Yunfang Hu, 2023. "A heterogeneous-firm model of trade and growth with country-specific credit constraints," Discussion Paper Series 256, School of Economics, Kwansei Gakuin University.
    3. Fukuda, Katsufumi, 2019. "Effects of trade liberalization on growth and welfare through basic and applied researches," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    4. Thang T. Vo & Dinh X. Nguyen, 2021. "Impact of Trade Liberalization on Household Welfare: An Analysis Using Household Exposure-to-Trade Indices," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 153(2), pages 503-531, January.
    5. Kishi, Keiichi & Okada, Keisuke, 2018. "Trade Liberalization, Technology Diffusion, and Productivity," MPRA Paper 88597, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Takumi Naito, 2021. "Can The Optimal Tariff Be Zero For A Growing Large Country?," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 62(3), pages 1237-1280, August.
    7. Guzmán Ourens, 2020. "The long-term impact of trade with firm heterogeneity," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 156(4), pages 887-919, November.
    8. Tatsuro Iwaisako & Hitoshi Tanaka, 2020. "Tariffs and Foreign Direct Investment in a North South Product Cycle Model," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 20-08, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.
    9. Kishi, Keiichi & Okada, Keisuke, 2021. "The impact of trade liberalization on productivity distribution under the presence of technology diffusion and innovation," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).

    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. Naito, Takumi, 2019. "A lab-equipment model of growth with heterogeneous firms and asymmetric countries," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 33-36.
    2. Takumi Naito, 2021. "Can The Optimal Tariff Be Zero For A Growing Large Country?," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 62(3), pages 1237-1280, August.
    3. Guzmán Ourens, 2020. "The long-term impact of trade with firm heterogeneity," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 156(4), pages 887-919, November.
    4. Ourens, Guzmán, 2016. "Trade and growth with heterogeneous firms revisited," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 194-202.
    5. Maemir, H. & Ziesemer, T., 2014. "Multinational production and trade in an endogenous growth model with heterogeneous firms," MERIT Working Papers 2014-038, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    6. Swati Dhingra & Hanwei Huang & Gianmarco Ottaviano & João Paulo Pessoa & Thomas Sampson & John Van Reenen, 2017. "The costs and benefits of leaving the EU: trade effects," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 32(92), pages 651-705.
    7. Etro, Federico, 2017. "Research in economics and macroeconomics," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 373-383.
    8. Naito, Takumi, 2017. "An asymmetric Melitz model of trade and growth," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 80-83.
    9. Paul S. Segerstrom & Ignat Stepanok, 2018. "Learning How To Export," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 120(1), pages 63-92, January.
    10. Francisco J. Buera & Ezra Oberfield, 2020. "The Global Diffusion of Ideas," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(1), pages 83-114, January.
    11. Alessandria, George & Choi, Horag, 2014. "Establishment heterogeneity, exporter dynamics, and the effects of trade liberalization," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 207-223.
    12. Kishi, Keiichi & Okada, Keisuke, 2018. "Trade Liberalization, Technology Diffusion, and Productivity," MPRA Paper 88597, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Kishi, Keiichi & Okada, Keisuke, 2021. "The impact of trade liberalization on productivity distribution under the presence of technology diffusion and innovation," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    14. Andrew B. Bernard & J. Bradford Jensen & Stephen J. Redding & Peter K. Schott, 2018. "Global Firms," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 56(2), pages 565-619, June.
    15. Ufuk Akcigit & Sina T. Ates & Giammario Impullitti, 2018. "Innovation and Trade Policy in a Globalized World," NBER Working Papers 24543, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Haruyama, Tetsugen & Zhao, Laixun, 2017. "Trade and firm heterogeneity in a Schumpeterian model of growth," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 540-563.
    17. Alessandria, George & Choi, Horag & Ruhl, Kim J., 2021. "Trade adjustment dynamics and the welfare gains from trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    18. Costinot, Arnaud & Rodríguez-Clare, Andrés, 2014. "Trade Theory with Numbers: Quantifying the Consequences of Globalization," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 197-261, Elsevier.
    19. Jesse Perla & Christopher Tonetti & Michael E. Waugh, 2021. "Equilibrium Technology Diffusion, Trade, and Growth," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(1), pages 73-128, January.
    20. Naito, Takumi, 2012. "A Ricardian model of trade and growth with endogenous trade status," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 80-88.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Trade and growth; Heterogeneous firms; Asymmetric countries; Unilateral trade liberalization; Endogenous growth;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F1 - International Economics - - Trade
    • F4 - International Economics - - Macroeconomic Aspects of International Trade and Finance

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:van:wpaper:vuecon-sub-17-00004. 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: John P. Conley (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.vanderbilt.edu/econ/wparchive/index.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.