IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cje/issued/v42y2009i2p519-553.html

Development-related biases in factor productivities and the HOV model of trade

Author

Listed:
  • Keith E. Maskus
  • Shuichiro Nishioka

Abstract

tried to resuscitate HOV by introducing a simple Hicks-neutral (HN) factor-productivity adjustment. In this paper, we re-examine this question by estimating factor-specific productivities from the individual technology data of multiple developed and developing countries. We find evidence of factor-augmenting technological differences. Further, the ratios of factor productivities are strongly correlated with corresponding factor endowments. This systematic bias implies that the ability of HOV to explain North-South factor trade depends on both relative factor abundance and factor-augmenting productivity gaps.

Suggested Citation

  • Keith E. Maskus & Shuichiro Nishioka, 2009. "Development-related biases in factor productivities and the HOV model of trade," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 42(2), pages 519-553, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:cje:issued:v:42:y:2009:i:2:p:519-553
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5982.2009.01518.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5982.2009.01518.x
    Download Restriction: access restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1540-5982.2009.01518.x?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

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. repec:wvu:wpaper:09-03 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:wvu:wpaper:09-13 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Fisher, Eric O'N., 2011. "Heckscher-Ohlin theory when countries have different technologies," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 202-210, April.
    4. 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(1), pages 131-168, February.
    5. Chen, Maggie Xiaoyang & Joshi, Sumit, 2010. "Third-country effects on the formation of free trade agreements," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 238-248, November.
    6. Robert Stehrer, 2014. "Does the Home Bias Explain Missing Trade in Factors?," wiiw Working Papers 110, The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, wiiw.
    7. Fadinger, Harald, 2011. "Productivity differences in an interdependent world," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 221-232, July.
    8. Cristiano, Antonelli, 2019. "The creative response and international trade11The comments of the anonymous referees and the editor are gratefully acknowledged. The funding of my Department are acknowledged," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 445-452.
    9. Davide Gandolfi & Timothy Halliday & Raymond Robertson, 2017. "Trade, FDI, migration, and the place premium: Mexico and the United States," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 153(1), pages 1-37, February.
    10. Keith E. Maskus & Shuichiro Nishioka, 2009. "Development‐related biases in factor productivities and the HOV model of trade," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(2), pages 519-553, May.
    11. repec:wvu:wpaper:09-02 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Nishioka, Shuichiro, 2012. "International differences in production techniques: Implications for the factor content of trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 98-104.
    13. Hausmann, Ricardo & Stock, Daniel P. & Yıldırım, Muhammed A., 2022. "Implied comparative advantage," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(8).
    14. Marshall, Kathryn G., 2012. "International productivity and factor price comparisons," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 386-390.
    15. Kozo Kiyota, 2021. "The Leontief Paradox Redux," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 296-313, May.
    16. Eric O'N. Fisher & John Gilbert & Kathryn G. Marshall & Reza Oladi, 2015. "A New Measure of Economic Distance," CESifo Working Paper Series 5362, CESifo.
    17. Andrés Artal‐Tur & Carlos Llano‐Verduras & Francisco Requena‐Silvente, 2010. "Factor productivity differences and missing trade problems in a regional HOV model," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 89(4), pages 759-776, November.
    18. Chor, Davin, 2010. "Unpacking sources of comparative advantage: A quantitative approach," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 152-167, November.
    19. Artal-Tur, Andrés & Castillo-Giménez, Juana & Llano-Verduras, Carlos & Requena-Silvente, Francisco, 2011. "The factor content of regional bilateral trade: The role of technology and demand," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 157-172, April.
    20. Hausmann, Ricardo & Hidalgo, Cesar A. & Stock, Daniel P. & Yildirim, Muhammed A., 2014. "Implied Comparative Advantage," Working Paper Series rwp14-003, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    21. Puzzello, Laura, 2012. "A proportionality assumption and measurement biases in the factor content of trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 105-111.
    22. Trefler, Daniel & Zhu, Susan Chun, 2010. "The structure of factor content predictions," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 195-207, November.
    23. Kris James Mitchener & Se Yan, 2010. "Globalization, Trade & Wages: What Does History tell us about China?," NBER Working Papers 15679, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    24. Yan, Yunfeng & Wang, Ran & Zheng, Xiuxiu & Zhao, Zhongxiu, 2020. "Carbon endowment and trade-embodied carbon emissions in global value chains: Evidence from China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 277(C).
    25. Nishioka, Shuichiro, 2013. "R&D, trade in intermediate inputs, and the comparative advantage of advanced countries," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 96-110.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F10 - International Economics - - Trade - - - General
    • F11 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Neoclassical Models of Trade

    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:42:y:2009:i:2:p:519-553. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.