IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Growth and Interdependence under Complete Specialization


  • Alejandro Cuñat
  • Marco Maffezzoli


We construct and numerically solve a dynamic Heckscher-Ohlin model in which the initial distribution of production factors in the world makes world-wide factor price equalization impossible, and leads countries to group in two diversification cones. We study the dynamics of income components and factor prices. Our results suggest that the Ramsey model under complete specialization (CS) overcomes several shortcomings of its autarchy and factor-price-equalization (FPE) counterparts. In comparison with the autarchy model, it can account for important cross-sectional differences in income per capita growth rates without generating too large rental-rate differentials across countries. Furthermore, the CS model generates cross-country convergence in growth rates and levels along the transition towards the steady-state. Finally, the CS model converges to FPE in the long run. Unlike the autarchy model, FPE does not necessarily yield convergence in levels; however, international trade is beneficial to both countries in terms of welfare.

Suggested Citation

  • Alejandro Cuñat & Marco Maffezzoli, "undated". "Growth and Interdependence under Complete Specialization," Working Papers 183, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
  • Handle: RePEc:igi:igierp:183

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. James J. Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Petra E. Todd, 1997. "Matching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator: Evidence from Evaluating a Job Training Programme," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 64(4), pages 605-654.
    2. Rajeev H. Dehejia & Sadek Wahba, 1998. "Causal Effects in Non-Experimental Studies: Re-Evaluating the Evaluation of Training Programs," NBER Working Papers 6586, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. John Ferejohn, 1986. "Incumbent performance and electoral control," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 5-25, January.
    4. Rafael Di Tella & Alberto Ades, 1999. "Rents, Competition, and Corruption," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(4), pages 982-993, September.
    5. Richard Blundell & Monica Costa Dias, 2000. "Evaluation methods for non-experimental data," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 21(4), pages 427-468, January.
    6. James Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Jeffrey Smith & Petra Todd, 1998. "Characterizing Selection Bias Using Experimental Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(5), pages 1017-1098, September.
    7. James J. Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Petra Todd, 1998. "Matching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 65(2), pages 261-294.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Taketo Kawagishi & Kazuo Mino, 2016. "Time Preference and Income Convergence in a Dynamic Heckscher–Ohlin Model," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(3), pages 592-603, August.
    2. Rana Ejaz Ali Khan & Nadia Bashir, 2011. "Trade Liberalization, Poverty and Inequality Nexus: A Case Study of India," Asian Economic and Financial Review, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 1(3), pages 114-119, September.
    3. Petia Topalova, 2007. "Trade Liberalization, Poverty and Inequality: Evidence from Indian Districts," NBER Chapters,in: Globalization and Poverty, pages 291-336 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Alejandro Cunat & Marco Maffezzoli, 2003. "The Generalized Neoclassical Growth Model," Working Papers 231, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:igi:igierp:183. 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: (). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    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.