The choice between a tariff and a quota under uncertainty
- 27 Downloads
- 1 Citations
Conclusions
The results concerning the choice between a tariff and a quota under the assumption of perfect competition and three kinds of uncertainty are summarized in the table.
An analysis of the uncertainty, under which a government using a tariff or a quota can determine the value of imports or the quantity domestically supplied (i.e. employment), gives neither the same result for the two instruments (equivalence) nor the same result for the three situations considered. Therefore the choice between a tariff and a quota in case of uncertainty depends on the purpose, and whether the initial uncertainty concerns domestic demand, foreign or domestic supply. This conclusion corresponds to the well-known phenomenon that in case of a disturbance to an open economy the choice between a change in the rate of exchange and a change in the demand policy depends both on the goal and on the kind of disturbance.
Keywords
Monetary Policy Price Elasticity Demand Curve Domestic Demand Supply FunctionPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- Bhagwati, J. N., andT.N. Srinivasan, “Optimal Intervention to Achieve Non-Economic Objectives”The Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 36, Edinburgh, 1969, pp. 27–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Dasgupta, P., andJ. Stiglitz, “Tariffs vs. Quotas as Revenue Raising Devices under Uncertainty”The American Economic Review, Vol. 67, Menasha, Wisc., 1977, pp. 975–981.Google Scholar
- Fishelson, Gideon, andFrank Flatters, “The (Non) Equivalence of Optimal Tariffs and Quotas under Uncertainty”,Journal of International Economics, Vol. 5, Amsterdam, 1975, pp. 385–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Meade, J. E.,Trade and Welfare, London, 1955.Google Scholar
- Pelcovits, Michael D., “Quotas versus Tariffs”,Journal of International Economics, Vol. 6, Amsterdam, 1976, pp. 363–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Poole, William, “Optimal Choice of Monetary Policy Instruments in a Simple Stochastic Macro Model”,The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 84, Cambridge, Mass., 1970, pp. 197–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar