IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Trade and American Cities: Who has the Comparative Advantage?

Listed author(s):
  • Heizi Noponen

    (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)

  • Ann Markusen

    (Rutgers University)

  • Karl Driessen

    (International Monetary Fund)

Registered author(s):

    Metropolitan areas across the United States are quite differentially positioned to benefit from greater international market integration. The authors hypothesizefzat because cities possess quite diverse industrial mixes, their stakes in national trade regimes and appropriate strategies for responding to altered trade opportunities will differ substantially. Using a modified shift-share technique with merged trade and industrial data at the three-digit level, the authors show that cities do indeed range widely in their relative comparative advantages. Furthermore, cities within a single state often have quite different stakes in heightened trade activity; some are better positioned to export, whereas others have more to gain from import protection or policies to strengthen domestic markets. Possessing a port no longer assures a metropolitan area a superior advantage in trade. The authors conclude that cities should study and fashion their own trade policies uniquely to match their existing and future capabilities.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by in its journal Economic Development Quarterly.

    Volume (Year): 11 (1997)
    Issue (Month): 1 (February)
    Pages: 67-87

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:sae:ecdequ:v:11:y:1997:i:1:p:67-87
    Contact details of provider:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:ecdequ:v:11:y:1997:i:1:p:67-87. 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: (SAGE Publications)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.