Advertisement

Open Economies Review

, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp 391–402 | Cite as

Specialization and Welfare in the Presence of Imperfectly Integrated Capital Markets and Learning-by-doing

  • Roland Hodler
Article
  • 56 Downloads

Abstract

We study a two-sector, two-period model with learning externalities in the modern sector and imperfectly integrated capital markets. We find that higher capital market integration lowers the requirements on the learning pattern necessary for free trade to lead to an equilibrium with maximal specialization in modern sector activities. We further find that the equilibrium with maximal specialization in modern sector activities Pareto dominates, if it exists, any other free trade equilibrium, and that autarky can Pareto dominate free trade if capital markets are poorly integrated, even when there is maximal specialization in modern sector activities under free trade.

Keywords

Capital market integration Learning-by-doing Trade patterns Gains from trade 

JEL Classification

F36 F12 F15 G15 O16 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Nils Herger, workshop participants at Monash University and the University of Otago, and a referee for helpful comments. Financial support of the Ecoscientia and the Swiss National Science Foundation is gratefully acknowledged.

References

  1. Ades A, di Tella R (1997) National champions and corruption: some unpleasant interventionist arithmetic. Econ J 107:1023–1042CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baldwin RE (1969) The case against infant-industry tariff protection. J Polit Econ 77:295–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernanke B, Gertler M (1990) Financial fragility and economic performance. Q J Econ 105:87–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bond EW (1993) Capital market imperfections and the infant industry argument for protection. In: Ethier WJ, Helpman E, Neary JP (eds) Theory, policy and dynamics in international trade. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. Corden WM (1974) Trade policy and economic welfare. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  6. Flam H, Staiger R (1991) Adverse selection in credit markets and infant industry protection. In: Helpmann E, Razin A (eds) International trade and trade policy. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  7. Gruber H (1998) Learning by doing and spillovers: further evidence for the semiconductor industry. Rev Ind Organ 13:697–711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Irwin DA, Klenow PJ (1994) Learning-by-doing spillovers in the semiconductor industry. J Polit Econ 102:1200–1227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Krueger AO (1974) The political economy of the rent seeking society. Am Econ Rev 64:291–303Google Scholar
  10. Krueger AO (1990) Government failures in development. J Econ Perspect 4:9–23Google Scholar
  11. Krueger AO (1995) Policy lessons from development experience since the second world war. In: Behrman J, Srinivasan TN (eds) Handbook of development economics IIIB. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  12. Krugman P (1987) The narrow moving band, the dutch disease, and the competitive consequences of Mrs. Thatcher. J Dev Econ 27: 41–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Murphy KM, Shleifer A, Vishney RW (1989) Industralization and the big push. J Polit Econ 97: 1003–1026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Newbery DMG, Stiglitz JE (1984) Pareto inferior trade. Rev Econ Stud 51:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Redding S (1999) Dynamic comparative advantage and the welfare effect of trade. Oxf Econ Pap 51:15–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Rodrik D (1996) Coordination failures and government policy: a model with applications to East Asia and Eastern Europe. J Int Econ 40:1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Thornton RA, Thompson P (2001) Learning from experience and learning from others: an exploration of learning and spillovers in wartime shipbuilding. Am Econ Rev 91:1350–1368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Young A (1991) Learning by doing and the dynamic effect of international trade. Q J Econ 106: 369–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Zimmerman MB (1982) Learning effects and the commercialization of new energy technologies: the case of nuclear power. Bell J Econ 13:297–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roland Hodler
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EconomicsThe University of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations