IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

International trade and competitiveness

  • Armando Garcia Pires

    ()

We analyze the role of international market size differences in determining the investment in process R&D (and thus firms’ competitiveness) in a trade model with oligopolistic market structure, non-homothetic production technology and costly trade. We show that the R&D effort is higher (or even disproportionately so) for firms in the larger market, which causes endogenous asymmetries across countries. As a result, firms in the larger market have higher competitiveness, which increases their market shares in international markets. Furthermore, and contrary to what is predicted by Krugman (Am Econ Rev 70:950–959, 1980 ) “home market effect”, in equilibrium the larger country does not need to host a disproportionately higher share of the world’s industry than of the world’s demand. Despite this, the larger country can still continue to run a trade surplus in the oligopolistic sector, since it hosts firms with higher competitiveness than firms in the smaller country. Copyright Springer-Verlag 2012

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: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s00199-010-0586-2
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Springer & Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET) in its journal Economic Theory.

Volume (Year): 50 (2012)
Issue (Month): 3 (August)
Pages: 727-763

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:spr:joecth:v:50:y:2012:i:3:p:727-763
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.springer.com

Web page: http://saet.uiowa.edu/

More information through EDIRC

Order Information: Web: http://www.springer.com/economics/economic+theory/journal/199/PS2

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Fudenberg, Drew & Tirole, Jean, 1984. "The Fat-Cat Effect, the Puppy-Dog Ploy, and the Lean and Hungry Look," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(2), pages 361-66, May.
  2. James Brander & Paul Krugman, 1982. "A 'Reciprocal Dumping' Model of International Trade," Working Papers 513, Queen's University, Department of Economics.
  3. Werner Antweiler & Daniel Trefler, 2002. "Increasing Returns and All That: A View from Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 93-119, March.
  4. Emmanuel Petrakis & Minas Vlassis, 2004. "Endogenous wage bargaining institutions in oligopolistic sectors," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 24(1), pages 55-73, 07.
  5. Hummels, D. & Levinsohn, J., 1993. "Monopolistic Competition and International Trade: Reconsidering the Evidence," Working Papers 339, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
  6. Davis, D.R. & Weinstein, D.E., 1997. "Does Economic Geography Matter for International Specialization?," Working Papers 403, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
  7. Donald R. Davis, 1997. "The Home Market, Trade, and Industrial Structure," NBER Working Papers 6076, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  8. Donald R. Davis & David E. Weinstein, 1997. "Economic Geography and Regional Production Structure: An Empirical Investigation," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1802, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
  9. Harrigan, James, 1996. "Openness to trade in manufactures in the OECD," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1-2), pages 23-39, February.
  10. Keith Head & Thierry Mayer & John Ries, 2002. "On the pervasiveness of home market effects," Sciences Po publications info:hdl:2441/c8dmi8nm4pd, Sciences Po.
  11. Michael Fung, 2002. "Technological Opportunity and Economies of Scale in Research Productivity: A Study on Three Global Industries," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 419-436, December.
  12. Jan Fagerberg, 1988. "International Competitiveness," Working Papers Archives 1988001, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
  13. Bee Yan Aw & Mark J. Roberts & Daniel Yi Xu, 2008. "R&D Investments, Exporting, and the Evolution of Firm Productivity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(2), pages 451-56, May.
  14. Licandro, Omar & Navas-Ruiz, Antonio, 2007. "Trade Liberalization, Competition and Growth," CEPR Discussion Papers 6500, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  15. Wakelin, Katharine, 1998. "Innovation and export behaviour at the firm level," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(7-8), pages 829-841, April.
  16. Roper, Stephen & Love, James H., 2002. "Innovation and export performance: evidence from the UK and German manufacturing plants," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(7), pages 1087-1102, September.
  17. Andrew B. Bernard & Jonathan Eaton & J. Bradford Jensen & Samuel Kortum, 2003. "Plants and Productivity in International Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(4), pages 1268-1290, September.
  18. Marc J. Melitz & Gianmarco I.P. Ottaviano, 2005. "Market Size, Trade, and Productivity," Development Working Papers 201, Centro Studi Luca d'Agliano, University of Milano.
  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. Krugman, Paul, 1980. "Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the Pattern of Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 950-59, December.
  21. Krugman, Paul, 1991. "Increasing Returns and Economic Geography," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(3), pages 483-99, June.
  22. Raphael Bergoeing & Timothy J. Kehoe, 2001. "Trade Theory and Trade Facts," Documentos de Trabajo 109, Centro de Economía Aplicada, Universidad de Chile.
  23. Andrew B. Bernard & J. Bradford Jensen, 1997. "Exceptional Exporter Performance: Cause, Effect, or Both?," NBER Working Papers 6272, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  24. Edwin Lai & Raymond Riezman & Ping Wang, 2009. "Outsourcing of innovation," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 38(3), pages 485-515, March.
  25. Eric Bond & Kazumichi Iwasa & Kazuo Nishimura, 2011. "A dynamic two country Heckscher–Ohlin model with non-homothetic preferences," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 48(1), pages 171-204, September.
  26. Leahy, Dermot & Neary, J Peter, 2007. "Multilateral Subsidy Games," CEPR Discussion Papers 6479, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  27. Roberts, Mark J & Tybout, James R, 1997. "The Decision to Export in Colombia: An Empirical Model of Entry with Sunk Costs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(4), pages 545-64, September.
  28. Teteryatnikova, Mariya, 2008. "R&D in the network of international trade: multilateral versus regional trade agreements," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2009-03, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
  29. Fagerberg, Jan, 1988. "International Competitiveness: Errata," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(393), pages 1203, December.
  30. Lachenmaier, Stefan & Wößmann, Ludger, 2006. "Does innovation cause exports? Evidence from exogenous innovation impulses and obstacles using German micro data," Munich Reprints in Economics 19482, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
  31. Jonathan Eaton & Samuel Kortum, 2002. "Technology, Geography, and Trade," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(5), pages 1741-1779, September.
  32. Jan Fagerberg, 1995. "Is there a large-country advantage in high-tech?," Working Papers Archives 1995526, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
  33. James Brander, 1980. "Intra-Industry Trade in Identical Commodities," Working Papers 380, Queen's University, Department of Economics.
  34. Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1991. "Game Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262061414.
  35. Martin, Philippe & Rogers, Carol Ann, 1994. "Industrial Location and Public Infrastructure," CEPR Discussion Papers 909, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  36. Naghavi, Alireza & Ottaviano, Gianmarco, 2006. "Offshoring and Product Innovation," CEPR Discussion Papers 6008, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  37. Gustavsson, Patrik & Hansson, Pär & Lundberg, Lars, 1996. "Technology, Resource Endowments and International Competitiveness," Working Paper Series 138, Trade Union Institute for Economic Research.
  38. Helpman, Elhanan, 1987. "Imperfect competition and international trade: Evidence from fourteen industrial countries," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 62-81, March.
  39. Xavier Vives, 2001. "Oligopoly Pricing: Old Ideas and New Tools," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 026272040x.
  40. Bee Yan Aw & Mark J. Roberts & Daniel Yi Xu, 2009. "R&D Investment, Exporting, and Productivity Dynamics," NBER Working Papers 14670, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  41. Colin Lawrence & Pablo T. Spiller, 1983. "Product Diversity, Economies of Scale, and International Trade," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 98(1), pages 63-83.
  42. Keith Head & John Ries, 2001. "Increasing Returns versus National Product Differentiation as an Explanation for the Pattern of U.S.-Canada Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 858-876, September.
  43. Johan Torstensson, 1998. "Country size and comparative advantage: An empirical study," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 134(4), pages 590-611, December.
  44. Haiwen Zhou, 2004. "The division of labor and the extent of the market," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 24(1), pages 195-209, 07.
  45. Lundberg, Lars, 1988. " Technology, Factor Proportions and Competitiveness," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 90(2), pages 173-88.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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:spr:joecth:v:50:y:2012:i:3:p:727-763. 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: (Sonal Shukla)

or (Rebekah McClure)

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.