IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pen/papers/09-015.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Ricardo Meets China, India and U.S. Three Hundred Years Later

Author

Listed:
  • Yochanan Shachmurove

    (Department of Economics, City College of The City University of New York and The Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania)

  • Uriel Spiegel

    (Department of Interdisciplinary Social Studies Bar Ilan University, and Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania)

Abstract

As our trading world becomes more globalized, who benefits and who gets hurt? This paper relies on the Ricardian model to explore the effects of technological improvements in underdeveloped countries on the welfare of developed countries. For example, trading between the United States and China, which has undergone a technological improvement in commodities which China imports and exports, may lead to different welfare implications for both countries. The paper models several scenarios to indicate and demonstrate the arguments for and against globalization. The findings suggest that certain policies should be implemented to maintain and enhance the competitiveness of developed countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Yochanan Shachmurove & Uriel Spiegel, 2009. "Ricardo Meets China, India and U.S. Three Hundred Years Later," PIER Working Paper Archive 09-015, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    • Handle: RePEc:pen:papers:09-015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://economics.sas.upenn.edu/sites/default/files/filevault/working-papers/09-015.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rudiger Dornbusch & Stanley Fischer & Paul A. Samuelson, 1980. "Heckscher-Ohlin Trade Theory with a Continuum of Goods," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 95(2), pages 203-224.
    2. Baldwin, Robert E, 1971. "Determinants of the Commodity Structure of U.S. Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 126-146, March.
    3. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    4. Paul A. Samuelson, 2004. "Where Ricardo and Mill Rebut and Confirm Arguments of Mainstream Economists Supporting Globalization," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 18(3), pages 135-146, Summer.
    5. repec:fth:michin:323 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Wolfgang F. Stolper & Paul A. Samuelson, 1941. "Protection and Real Wages," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 9(1), pages 58-73.
    7. Jagdish Bhagwati & Arvind Panagariya, 2004. "The Muddles over Outsourcing," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 18(4), pages 93-114, Fall.
    8. Lionel W. McKenzie, 2005. "Classical General Equilibrium Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262633302, December.
    9. Bowen, Harry P & Leamer, Edward E & Sveikauskas, Leo, 1987. "Multicountry, Multifactor Tests of the Factor Abundance Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(5), pages 791-809, December.
    10. Johnson, George E & Stafford, Frank P, 1993. "International Competition and Real Wages," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(2), pages 127-130, May.
    11. Samuelson, Paul A, 1974. "Complementarity-An Essay on the 40th Anniversary of the Hicks-Allen Revolution in Demand Theory," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 1255-1289, December.
    12. Simon Kuznets, 1946. "National Income: A Summary of Findings," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number kuzn46-2, March.
    13. Martin Neil Baily & Robert Z. Lawrence, 2004. "What Happened to the Great U.S. Job Machine? The Role of Trade and Electronic Offshoring," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 35(2), pages 211-284.
    14. Dornbusch, Rudiger & Fischer, Stanley & Samuelson, Paul A, 1977. "Comparative Advantage, Trade, and Payments in a Ricardian Model with a Continuum of Goods," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(5), pages 823-839, December.
    15. Trefler, Daniel, 1995. "The Case of the Missing Trade and Other Mysteries," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1029-1046, December.
    16. Samuelson, P. A., 1972. "Heretical doubts about the international mechanisms," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 443-453, September.
    17. F. Gerard Adams & Byron Gangnes & Yochanan Shachmurove, 2006. "Why is China so Competitive? Measuring and Explaining China's Competitiveness," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 95-122, February.
    18. Jagdish N. Bhagwati, 2004. "In Defense of Globalization: It Has a Human Face," Rivista di Politica Economica, SIPI Spa, vol. 94(6), pages 9-20, November-.
    19. Bhagwati, Jagdish, 2004. "Anti-globalization: why?," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 439-463, June.
    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. Daniel Bernhofen, 2010. "The Empirics of General Equilibrium Tade Theory: What Have we Learned?," CESifo Working Paper Series 3242, CESifo.
    2. Peter M. Morrow, 2008. "East is East and West is West: A Ricardian-Heckscher-Ohlin Model of Comparative Advantage," Working Papers 575, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    3. repec:eee:labchp:v:3:y:1999:i:pb:p:2215-2288 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Gene M. Grossman & Esteban Rossi-Hansberg, 2006. "The rise of offshoring: it's not wine for cloth anymore," Proceedings - Economic Policy Symposium - Jackson Hole, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, pages 59-102.
    5. Sunil Mithas & Jonathan Whitaker, 2007. "Is the World Flat or Spiky? Information Intensity, Skills, and Global Service Disaggregation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 237-259, September.
    6. Boggio, Luciano, 2009. "Long-run effects of low-wage countries' growing competitiveness and exports of manufactures," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 38-49, March.
    7. Sabine Engelmann, 2014. "International trade, technological change and wage inequality in the UK economy," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 41(2), pages 223-246, May.
    8. Saint-Paul, Gilles, 2007. "Making sense of Bolkestein-bashing: Trade liberalization under segmented labor markets," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 152-174, September.
    9. Artal-Tur, Andrés & Castillo-Giménez, Juana & Llano-Verduras, Carlos & Requena-Silvente, Francisco, 2011. "The factor content of regional bilateral trade: The role of technology and demand," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 157-172, April.
    10. Peter K. Schott, 2001. "Do Rich and Poor Countries Specialize in a Different Mix of Goods? Evidence from Product-Level US Trade Data," NBER Working Papers 8492, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Rosario Crinò, 2010. "Service Offshoring and White-Collar Employment," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 77(2), pages 595-632.
    12. Yochanan Shachmurove & Uriel Spiegel, 2006. "Technological Improvements and Comparative Advantage Reconsidered," PIER Working Paper Archive 06-023, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    13. Yilmazkuday, Hakan, 2009. "Distribution of Consumption, Production and Trade within the U.S," MPRA Paper 16361, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Kagawa, Shigemi, 2008. "How does Japanese compliance with the Kyoto Protocol affect environmental productivity in China and Japan?," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 173-188, June.
    15. Morrow, Peter M. & Trefler, Daniel, 2022. "How do endowments determine trade? quantifying the output mix, factor price, and skill-biased technology channels," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    16. Donald R. Davis & David E. Weinstein, 2001. "An Account of Global Factor Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1423-1453, December.
    17. J. Peter Neary, 2016. "International Trade in General Oligopolistic Equilibrium," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(4), pages 669-698, September.
    18. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/3201 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Gregory Mankiw, N. & Swagel, Phillip, 2006. "The politics and economics of offshore outsourcing," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(5), pages 1027-1056, July.
    20. Singh, Ajit., 2007. "Globalisation, industrial revolutions in India and China and labour markets in advanced countries : implications for national and international economic policy," ILO Working Papers 993979343402676, International Labour Organization.
    21. Louis Dupuy & Matthew Agarwala, 2014. "International trade and sustainable development," Chapters, in: Giles Atkinson & Simon Dietz & Eric Neumayer & Matthew Agarwala (ed.), Handbook of Sustainable Development, chapter 25, pages 399-417, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    22. Morrow, Peter M., 2010. "Ricardian-Heckscher-Ohlin comparative advantage: Theory and evidence," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 137-151, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    International trade; Ricardian Model; Samuelson; Gainers and losers from trade; East-West trade; North-South Trade; China; India; United States; Outsourcing;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F0 - International Economics - - General
    • F1 - International Economics - - Trade
    • O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth
    • O1 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development
    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights
    • D51 - Microeconomics - - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium - - - Exchange and Production Economies

    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:pen:papers:09-015. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

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

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.