IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ces/ifosdt/v70y2017i09p03-18.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ricardo – gestern und heute

Author

Listed:
  • Gabriel Felbermayr
  • Benjamin Jung
  • Wilhelm Kohler
  • Philipp Harms
  • Jakob Schwab

Abstract

Vor 200 Jahren hat einer der Gründungsväter der modernen Volkswirtschaftslehre, David Ricardo, in seinem Buch Principles of Political Economy and Taxation die Theorie der komparativen Vorteile vorgestellt. Vom Abbau von Handelsbarrieren profitieren alle Länder, sogar die, die im Vergleich zu ihren Partnern absolute Produktivitätsnachteile haben. Ricardos Erkenntnis bildet die intellektuelle Grundlage für die graduelle Marktöffnung, die seit dem Zweiten Weltkrieg große Wohlstandsgewinne gebracht hat. Heute aber scheinen die Lehren Ricardos vergessen zu sein. Gabriel Felbermayr, ifo Institut und Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, verweist darauf, dass die globale Verfügbarkeit von Technologien das klassische ricardianische Motiv für Handel – die Spezialisierung auf Sektoren, bei denen komparative technologische Produktivitätsvorteile vorliegen – zunehmend zunichtemacht. Andere Treiber des Handels seien wichtiger: Produktdifferenzierung und die Ausbeutung von Größenvorteilen in der Produktion. Benjamin Jung, Universität Hohenheim, und Wilhelm Kohler, Universität Tübingen, führen aus, dass David Ricardo einen weiteren großen Beitrag zur Geschichte der Ökonomie geleistet hat: das sogenannte »Ricardianische System«, das er in seinem 1815 erschienenen Essay on Profits entwickelt habe und in dem es um Einkommensverteilung und Wachstum gehe. Philipp Harms, Universität Mainz, und Jakob Schwab, Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik, Bonn, stellen die Ergebnisse einer internationalen Umfrage zur Einschätzung der ökonomischen Globalisierung vor, die in zwei Wellen, 2003 und 2013, durchgeführt wurde. Die Unterschiede in der Ablehnung von Freihandel und multinationalen Unternehmen potenziellen »Globalisierungsverlierern« und potenziellen »Globalisierungsgewinnern« scheinen demnach zwischen 2003 und 2013 eher ab- als zugenommen zu haben.

Suggested Citation

  • Gabriel Felbermayr & Benjamin Jung & Wilhelm Kohler & Philipp Harms & Jakob Schwab, 2017. "Ricardo – gestern und heute," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 70(09), pages 03-18, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:ces:ifosdt:v:70:y:2017:i:09:p:03-18
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ifo.de/DocDL/sd-2017-09-felbermayr-etal-ricardo-2017-05-11.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David H. Autor & David Dorn & Gordon H. Hanson, 2016. "The China Shock: Learning from Labor-Market Adjustment to Large Changes in Trade," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 205-240, October.
    2. Jonathan Eaton & Samuel Kortum, 2012. "Putting Ricardo to Work," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(2), pages 65-90, Spring.
    3. Arnaud Costinot & Jonathan Vogel, 2015. "Beyond Ricardo: Assignment Models in International Trade," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 7(1), pages 31-62, August.
    4. 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.
    5. Wolfgang Dauth & Sebastian Findeisen & Jens Suedekum, 2014. "The Rise Of The East And The Far East: German Labor Markets And Trade Integration," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 12(6), pages 1643-1675, December.
    6. Philipp Harms & Jakob Schwab, 2019. "Like it or not? How the economic and institutional environment shapes individual attitudes towards multinational enterprises," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(3), pages 636-679, March.
    7. Mayda, Anna Maria & Rodrik, Dani, 2005. "Why are some people (and countries) more protectionist than others?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 1393-1430, August.
    8. Arnaud Costinot, 2009. "An Elementary Theory of Comparative Advantage," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(4), pages 1165-1192, July.
    9. Antràs, Pol & de Gortari, Alonso & Itskhoki, Oleg, 2017. "Globalization, inequality and welfare," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 387-412.
    10. Timothy J. Kehoe & Pau S. Pujolàs & Jack Rossbach, 2017. "Quantitative Trade Models: Developments and Challenges," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 9(1), pages 295-325, September.
    11. Solomon William Polachek, 1980. "Conflict and Trade," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 24(1), pages 55-78, March.
    12. M. Scott Taylor, 2011. "Buffalo Hunt: International Trade and the Virtual Extinction of the North American Bison," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(7), pages 3162-3195, December.
    13. Burgstaller, Andre, 1986. "Unifying Ricardo's Theories of Growth and Comparative Advantage," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 53(212), pages 467-481, November.
    14. Dave Donaldson, 2015. "The Gains from Market Integration," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 7(1), pages 619-647, August.
    15. Findlay, Ronald, 1974. "Relative Prices, Growth and Trade in a Simple Ricardian System," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 41(161), pages 1-13, February.
    16. Gene M. Grossman & Esteban Rossi-Hansberg, 2008. "Trading Tasks: A Simple Theory of Offshoring," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(5), pages 1978-1997, December.
    17. Dornbusch, Rudiger & Fischer, Stanley & Samuelson, Paul A, 1977. "Comparative Advantage, Trade, and Payments in a Ricardian Model with a Continuum of Goods," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(5), pages 823-839, December.
    18. Dixit, Avinash & Norman, Victor, 1986. "Gains from trade without lump-sum compensation," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1-2), pages 111-122, August.
    19. 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.
    20. Christian Gehrke, 2015. "Ricardo's discovery of comparative advantage revisited: a critique of Ruffin's account," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(5), pages 791-817, October.
    21. 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.
    22. Irwin, Douglas A, 1988. "Welfare Effects of British Free Trade: Debate and Evidence from the 1840s," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(6), pages 1142-1164, December.
    23. Rahel Aichele & Gabriel Felbermayr & Inga Heiland & Gabriel J. Felbermayr, 2014. "Going Deep: The Trade and Welfare Effects of TTIP," CESifo Working Paper Series 5150, CESifo.
    24. Arnaud Costinot & Dave Donaldson & Ivana Komunjer, 2012. "What Goods Do Countries Trade? A Quantitative Exploration of Ricardo's Ideas," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 79(2), pages 581-608.
    25. A. D. Roy, 1951. "Some Thoughts On The Distribution Of Earnings," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 135-146.
    26. Roy J. Ruffin, 2002. "David Ricardo's Discovery of Comparative Advantage," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 34(4), pages 727-748, Winter.
    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. Martin Braml & Gabriel Felbermayr & Wolfgang Weiß & Fritz Breuss & Christoph Scherrer & Christoph Herrmann & Caroline Glöckle & Benjamin Jung & Tim Krieger & Laura Renner & Bernd Lange, 2018. "Handelskrieg und seine Folgen: Ist die WTO am Ende?," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 71(11), pages 03-29, June.

    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. Mauro Lanati, 2013. "Estimating the elasticity of trade: the trade share approach," LEM Papers Series 2013/10, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    2. Mauro Lanati, 2013. "Estimating the elasticity of trade: the trade share approach," Discussion Papers 2013/159, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    3. Luca Salvatici & Silvia Nenci, 2017. "New features, forgotten costs and counterfactual gains of the international trading system," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 44(4), pages 592-633.
    4. Nelson Lind & Natalia Ramondo, 2018. "Trade with Correlation," NBER Working Papers 24380, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Scott L. Baier & Amanda Kerr & Yoto V. Yotov, 2018. "Gravity, distance, and international trade," Chapters, in: Bruce A. Blonigen & Wesley W. Wilson (ed.), Handbook of International Trade and Transportation, chapter 2, pages 15-78, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Lyon, Spencer G. & Waugh, Michael E., 2018. "Redistributing the gains from trade through progressive taxation," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 185-202.
    7. Engler, Philipp & Tervala, Juha, 2018. "Welfare effects of TTIP in a DSGE model," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 230-238.
    8. Konstantin Kucheryavyy & Gary Lyn & Andrés Rodríguez-Clare, 2016. "Grounded by Gravity: A Well-Behaved Trade Model with Industry-Level Economies of Scale," NBER Working Papers 22484, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Inga Heiland & Wilhelm Kohler, 2013. "Heterogeneous Workers, Trade, and Migration," CESifo Working Paper Series 4387, CESifo.
    10. Kohler Wilhelm & Jung Benjamin, 2017. "Wie vorteilhaft ist internationaler Handel?: Ein neuer Ansatz zur Vermessung der Gewinne," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, De Gruyter, vol. 18(1), pages 32-55, April.
    11. Natalia Ramondo, 2015. "Innovation and Production in the Global Economy," 2015 Meeting Papers 183, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    12. Nelson Lind & Natalia Ramondo, 2018. "Trade with Correlation," 2018 Meeting Papers 627, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    13. Kohl, Miriam, 2020. "Redistribution, selection, and trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    14. Edwin L.-C. Lai & Haichao Fan & Han Steffan Qi, 2020. "Global gains from reduction in trade costs," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 70(1), pages 313-345, July.
    15. William R Kerr, 2018. "Heterogeneous Technology Diffusion and Ricardian Trade Patterns," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 32(1), pages 163-182.
    16. Stefano Bolatto & Massimo Sbracia, 2016. "Deconstructing the Gains from Trade: Selection of Industries vs Reallocation of Workers," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 344-363, May.
    17. Finicelli, Andrea & Pagano, Patrizio & Sbracia, Massimo, 2013. "Ricardian selection," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 96-109.
    18. Kiminori Matsuyama, 2019. "Engel's Law in the Global Economy: Demand‐Induced Patterns of Structural Change, Innovation, and Trade," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(2), pages 497-528, March.
    19. Pablo D. Fajgelbaum & Amit K. Khandelwal, 2016. "Measuring the Unequal Gains from Trade," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 131(3), pages 1113-1180.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Komparativer Vorteil; Handelshemmnisse; Produktivität; Technischer Fortschritt; Innovationsdiffusion; Arbeitsteilung; Wirkungsanalyse; Außenhandel; Außenhandelsgewinn; Einkommensverteilung; Wirtschaftswachstum; Globalisierung; Freihandel; Multinationales Unternehmen; Ricardo; David;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution
    • F43 - International Economics - - Macroeconomic Aspects of International Trade and Finance - - - Economic Growth of Open Economies
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General

    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:ces:ifosdt:v:70:y:2017:i:09:p:03-18. 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: (Klaus Wohlrabe). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifooode.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.