Trade, Non-Scale Growth, and Uneven Development
This paper investigates the relationship between trade and economic development using a two-country, non-scale-growth model. Depending on the share of the expenditure for manufactured goods, we obtain two di erent results with regard to long-run production patterns. If the share of the expenditure is less than or equal to half, the leader country diversifies while the follower country asymptotically specializes in agriculture completely. If, on the other hand, the share of the expenditure is more than half, the leader country completely specializes in manufacturing while the follower country asymptotically specializes in agriculture completely. Whether or not the follower country can catch up with the leader country in the long run depends on two factors: (1) the patterns of production in both countries and (2) the measure of economic welfare that is used, that is, per capita income or per capita consumption.
|Date of creation:||Jun 2010|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Yoshida-Honmachi, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8501|
Web page: http://www.econ.kyoto-u.ac.jp/projectcenter/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Graham, Bryan S & Temple, Jonathan, 2001.
"Rich Nations, Poor Nations: How Much can Multiple Equilibria Explain?,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
3046, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Bryan Graham & Jonathan Temple, 2006. "Rich Nations, Poor Nations: How Much Can Multiple Equilibria Explain?," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 5-41, 03.
- Bryan S. Graham & Jonathan R. W. Temple, 2004. "Rich nations, poor nations: how much can multiple equilibria explain?," The Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper Series iiisdp017, IIIS.
- Graham, Bryan S. & Jonathan Temple, 2002. "Rich Nations, Poor Nations: How much can multiple equilibria explain?," Royal Economic Society Annual Conference 2002 91, Royal Economic Society.
- Sarkar, Prabirjit, 2001. "Technical Progress and the North-South Terms of Trade," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(3), pages 433-443, October.
- Mazumdar, Joy, 1996. "Do Static Gains from Trade Lead to Medium-Run Growth?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(6), pages 1328-1337, December.
- Peter Skott & Rajiv Sethi, 2000. "Uneven Development and Bilateral Conflict," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(4), pages 380-412, November.
- van Marrewijk, Charles & Verbeek, Jos, 1993. "Disequilibrium Growth Theory in an International Perspective," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(2), pages 311-331, April.
- Chui, Michael, et al, 2002. " North-South Models of Growth and Trade," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(2), pages 123-165, April.
- Felbermayr, Gabriel J., 2004.
"Specialization on a Technologically Stagnant Sector Need Not Be Bad for Growth,"
Center for European, Governance and Economic Development Research Discussion Papers
24, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
- Gabriel J. Felbermayr, 2007. "Specialization on a technologically stagnant sector need not be bad for growth," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 59(4), pages 682-701, October.
- Felbermayr, Gabriel, 2007. "Specialization on a technologically stagnant sector need not be bad for growth," Munich Reprints in Economics 20645, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
- Gabriel Felbermayr, 2004. "Specialization on a technologically atagnant aector need not be bad for growth," Economics working papers 2004-02, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
- Christiaans, Thomas, 2004. "Types of balanced growth," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 253-258, February.
- Molana, Hassan & Vines, David, 1988. "North-South Growth and the Terms of Trade," CEPR Discussion Papers 248, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Prabirjit Sarkar, 2009. "A Centre-Periphery Framework on Kaldorian Lines," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 393-401.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kue:dpaper:e-10-002. 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: (Graduate School of Economics Project Center)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.