IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/6835.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Did Late Nineteenth Century U.S. Tariffs Promote Infant Industries? Evidence from the Tinplate Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Dougas A. Irwin

Abstract

This paper examines the role of late nineteenth century U.S. tariffs in promoting infant industries by focusing on the much heralded example of the tinplate industry. After earlier failures, the tinplate industry became established and flourished after receiving protection in the McKinley tariff of 1890. Treating the entry and exit decisions of producers as endogenous, a probability model is estimated to determine the conditions under which domestic tinplate production will take place. Counterfactual simulations indicate that, in the absence of the McKinley duties, domestic tinplate production would have arisen about a decade later as U.S. iron and steel prices (comprising three-quarters of production costs) converged with those in Britain. While the tariff accelerated the industry's development, welfare calculations suggest that protection does not pass a cost-benefit test.

Suggested Citation

  • Dougas A. Irwin, 1998. "Did Late Nineteenth Century U.S. Tariffs Promote Infant Industries? Evidence from the Tinplate Industry," NBER Working Papers 6835, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:6835
    Note: DAE ITI
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w6835.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. G. R. Hawke, 1975. "The United States Tariff and Industrial Protection in the Late Nineteenth Century," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 28(1), pages 84-99, February.
    2. David, Paul A., 1970. "Learning By Doing and Tariff Protection: A Reconsideration of the Case of the Ante-Bellum United States Cotton Textile Industry," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(3), pages 521-601, September.
    3. Krueger, Anne O & Tuncer, Baran, 1994. "An Empirical Test of the Infant Industry Argument: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 1096-1096, September.
    4. Williamson, Jeffrey G., 1972. "Embodiment, Disembodiment, Learning by Doing, and Returns to Scale in Nineteenth-Century Cotton Textiles," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(3), pages 691-705, September.
    5. Krueger, Anne O & Tuncer, Baran, 1982. "An Empirical Test of the Infant Industry Argument," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(5), pages 1142-1152, December.
    6. Irwin, Douglas A & Klenow, Peter J, 1994. "Learning-by-Doing Spillovers in the Semiconductor Industry," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(6), pages 1200-1227, December.
    7. Head, Keith, 1994. "Infant industry protection in the steel rail industry," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3-4), pages 141-165, November.
    8. Harrison, Ann E, 1994. "An Empirical Test of the Infant Industry Argument: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 1090-1095, September.
    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. Harris, Richard & Keay, Ian & Lewis, Frank, 2015. "Protecting infant industries: Canadian manufacturing and the national policy, 1870–1913," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 15-31.
    2. Nathaniel Lane, 2020. "The New Empirics of Industrial Policy," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 209-234, June.
    3. repec:ilo:ilowps:455097 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Harrison, Ann E. & Rodriguez-Clare, Andres, 2009. "Trade, Foreign Investment, and Industrial Policy," MPRA Paper 15561, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Philippe Aghion & Jing Cai & Mathias Dewatripont & Luosha Du & Ann Harrison & Patrick Legros, 2022. "Industrial Policy and Competition," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Globalization, Firms, and Workers, chapter 15, pages 349-380, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Meissner, Christopher M., 2014. "Growth from Globalization? A View from the Very Long Run," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 8, pages 1033-1069, Elsevier.
    7. Harrison, Ann & Rodríguez-Clare, Andrés, 2010. "Trade, Foreign Investment, and Industrial Policy for Developing Countries," Handbook of Development Economics, in: Dani Rodrik & Mark Rosenzweig (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 4039-4214, Elsevier.
    8. Kanda Naknoi, 2008. "Tariffs and the Expansion of the American Pig Iron Industry, 1870-1940," Purdue University Economics Working Papers 1214, Purdue University, Department of Economics.
    9. Unterschultz, James R. & Lerohl, Mel L. & Peng, Yanning & Gurung, Rajendra Kumar, 1998. "A Nutraceutical Industry: Policy Implications for Future Directions," Project Report Series 24051, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
    10. Wu, Yiyun & Zhu, Xiwei & Groenewold, Nicolaas, 2019. "The determinants and effectiveness of industrial policy in china: A study based on Five-Year Plans," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 225-242.
    11. Kibritçioğlu, Aykut, 1996. "Friedrich List'in Bebek Endüstriler Tezi [Friedrich List's Infant Industry Argument]," MPRA Paper 2549, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Carson, Matthew., 2010. "Guiding structural change : the role of government in development," ILO Working Papers 994550973402676, International Labour Organization.
    13. Léo CHARLES, 2017. "A new empirical test of the infant-industry argument : the case of Switzerland protectionism during the 19th century," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2017-11, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    14. Antonio Tena Junguito, 2010. "Tariff History Lessons from the European Periphery. Protection Intensity and the Infant Industry Argument in Spain and Italy 1870-1930," Historical Social Research (Section 'Cliometrics'), Association Française de Cliométrie (AFC), vol. 35(1), pages 340-363.
    15. Ohashi, Hiroshi, 2005. "Learning by doing, export subsidies, and industry growth: Japanese steel in the 1950s and 1960s," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 297-323, July.
    16. Kaneda, Mitsuhiro, 2003. "Policy designs in a dynamic model of infant industry protection," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 91-115, October.
    17. Feenstra, Robert C., 1995. "Estimating the effects of trade policy," Handbook of International Economics, in: G. M. Grossman & K. Rogoff (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 30, pages 1553-1595, Elsevier.
    18. Mitsuhiro Kaneda, 2000. "Warranted Skepticism: A Dynamic Model of Infant Industry Protection," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 1668, Econometric Society.
    19. Lee, Jaymin, 1997. "The maturation and growth of infant industries: The case of Korea," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 25(8), pages 1271-1281, August.
    20. Salman Haider & Aadil Ahmad Ganaie & Bandi Kamaiah, 2019. "Total Factor Productivity and Openness in Indian Economy: 1970–2011," Foreign Trade Review, , vol. 54(1), pages 46-57, February.
    21. Feng, Yao, 2011. "Local spillovers and learning from neighbors: Evidence from durable adoptions in rural China," MPRA Paper 33924, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • N71 - Economic History - - Economic History: Transport, International and Domestic Trade, Energy, and Other Services - - - U.S.; Canada: Pre-1913

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:nbr:nberwo:6835. 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: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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: (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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.