IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v117y2012i1p18-20.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technology differences in empirical studies of international trade

Author

Listed:
  • Gundlach, Erich
  • de Vaal, Albert

Abstract

We show that the specification of technology differences in recent empirical studies of trade is not supported by basic growth theory and may lead to biased estimates of the pattern of specialization and trade.

Suggested Citation

  • Gundlach, Erich & de Vaal, Albert, 2012. "Technology differences in empirical studies of international trade," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 18-20.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:117:y:2012:i:1:p:18-20
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2012.04.080
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165176512002212
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econlet.2012.04.080?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 search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert M. Solow, 1956. "A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 70(1), pages 65-94.
    2. Harrigan, James, 1997. "Technology, Factor Supplies, and International Specialization: Estimating the Neoclassical Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(4), pages 475-494, September.
    3. Krugman, Paul R., 2000. "Technology, trade and factor prices," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 51-71, February.
    4. Ronald Findlay & Ronald W. Jones, 2018. "Factor Bias and Technical Progress," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: International Trade Theory and Competitive Models Features, Values, and Criticisms, chapter 11, pages 167-173, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. Alan V. Deardorff, 2011. "A geometry of growth and trade," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Robert M Stern (ed.), Comparative Advantage, Growth, And The Gains From Trade And Globalization A Festschrift in Honor of Alan V Deardorff, chapter 22, pages 237-249, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Debeare, Peter, 2003. "Relative Factor Abundance and Trade," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 111(3), pages 589-610, June.
    7. Trefler, Daniel, 1995. "The Case of the Missing Trade and Other Mysteries," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1029-1046, December.
    8. Alan V. Deardorff, 2001. "Does Growth Encourage Factor Price Equalization?," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(2), pages 169-181, June.
    9. Deardorff, Alan V, 2001. "Does Growth Encourage Factor Price Equalization?," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(2), pages 169-181, June.
    10. Peter J. Klenow & Andrés Rodríguez-Clare, 1997. "The Neoclassical Revival in Growth Economics: Has It Gone Too Far?," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1997, Volume 12, pages 73-114, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Ronald Findlay & Harry Grubert, 1959. "Factor Intensities, Technological Progress, And The Terms Of Trade," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 111-121.
    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. Becker, Daniel Thomas & Gundlach, Erich, 2006. "Notes on factor price equality and biased technical change in a two-cone trade model," Thuenen-Series of Applied Economic Theory 68, University of Rostock, Institute of Economics.
    2. Gundlach, Erich & de Vaal, Albert, 2008. "Technological change, trade, and endogenous factor endowments," Kiel Working Papers 1471, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    3. Ndubuisi, Gideon & Avenyo, Elvis, 2018. "Estimating the effects of robotization on exports," MERIT Working Papers 2018-046, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    4. Daniel Becker & Erich Gundlach, 2005. "Notes on Factor Price Equality and Biased Technological Change in a Two-Cone Trade Model," DEGIT Conference Papers c010_006, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade.
    5. Erich Gundlach, 2007. "The Solow model in the empirics of growth and trade," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 23(1), pages 25-44, Spring.
    6. Morrow, Peter M., 2010. "Ricardian-Heckscher-Ohlin comparative advantage: Theory and evidence," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 137-151, November.
    7. Haskel, Jonathan E. & Slaughter, Matthew J., 2002. "Does the sector bias of skill-biased technical change explain changing skill premia?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1757-1783, December.
    8. Pavel Ciaian & d'Artis Kancs & Jan Pokrivcak, 2008. "Comparative Advantages, Transaction Costs and Factor Content of Agricultural Trade: Empirical Evidence from the CEE," EERI Research Paper Series EERI_RP_2008_03, Economics and Econometrics Research Institute (EERI), Brussels.
    9. Ciaian, Pavel & Kancs, d'Artis & Pokrivcak, Jan, 2011. "Comparative Advantages, Transaction Costs and Factor Content in Agricultural Trade: Empirical Evidence from the CEE - Vantaggi comparati, costi di transazione e contenuto dei fattori nel commercio agr," Economia Internazionale / International Economics, Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato Agricoltura di Genova, vol. 64(1), pages 67-101.
    10. Trefler, Daniel & Zhu, Susan Chun, 2010. "The structure of factor content predictions," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 195-207, November.
    11. Lai, Huiwen & Zhu, Susan Chun, 2007. "Technology, endowments, and the factor content of bilateral trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 389-409, April.
    12. Fitzgerald, Doireann & Hallak, Juan Carlos, 2004. "Specialization, factor accumulation and development," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 277-302, December.
    13. Daniel Bernhofen, 2010. "The Empirics of General Equilibrium Tade Theory: What Have we Learned?," CESifo Working Paper Series 3242, CESifo.
    14. Robert Stehrer, 2010. "The effects of factor and sector biased technical change revisited," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 65-94, February.
    15. Batista, Catia & Potin, Jacques, 2008. "International Specialization and the Return to Capital, 1976-2000," ESSEC Working Papers DR 08001, ESSEC Research Center, ESSEC Business School.
    16. Catia Batista & Jacques Potin, 2007. "Stages of diversification and specialization in an Heckscher-Ohlin world, 1976-2000," Economics Series Working Papers 356, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    17. Catia Batista & Jacques Potin, 2007. "Heckscher-Ohlin Specialization and the Marginal Product of Capital, 1976-2000," Economics Series Working Papers 357, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    18. García, Pablo Marcelo, 2005. "Measuring Willingness-to-Pay in Discrete Chice Models with Semi-Parametric Techniques," Revista Latinoamericana de Desarrollo Economico, Carrera de Economía de la Universidad Católica Boliviana (UCB) "San Pablo", issue 5, pages 83-100, Octubre.
    19. Erich Gundlach, 2006. "The Solow Model in the Empirics of Cross-Country Growth," DEGIT Conference Papers c011_015, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade.
    20. Batista Cátia & Potin Jacques, 2015. "International specialization and the return to capital," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, vol. 15(2), pages 467-508, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Technology differences; Factor endowments; Specialization bias;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F11 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Neoclassical Models of Trade
    • O41 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - One, Two, and Multisector Growth Models

    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:eee:ecolet:v:117:y:2012:i:1:p:18-20. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    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.