The Annals of Regional Science

, Volume 46, Issue 2, pp 417–426 | Cite as

Rural–urban migration and multinational firms

  • Shigemi Yabuuchi
  • Hamid BeladiEmail author
Original Paper


In this paper, we re-examine the analysis on multinational firms and the theory of international trade and investment in the set-up with urban unemployment. A great majority of the recipient (host) countries are developing economies that are characterized by rural–urban migration in the face of urban unemployment. Thus, they have relatively developed urban sectors and less developed rural sectors. In this context we explore the implications of tariffs and taxes on the urban unemployment rate and national income.

JEL Classification

F21 R23 O17 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Basu B (2003) Rural–urban Migration, urban unemployment and the structural transformation of a dual economy. J Int Trade Econ Dev 9: 137–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Batra RN, Ramachandran R (1980) Multinational firms and the theory of international trade and investment. Am Econ Rev 70: 278–290Google Scholar
  3. Beladi H, Marjit S (1992) Foreign capital and protectionism. Can J Econ 25: 233–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beladi H, Marjit S (1996) An analysis of rural–urban migration and protection. Can J Econ XXIX(4): 930–940Google Scholar
  5. Bhagwati JN, Srinivasan TN (1974) On reanalyzing the Harris–Todaro model: policy rankings in the case of sector-specific stiky wages. Am Econ Rev 64: 502–508Google Scholar
  6. Chao CC, Yu ESH (2002) Immigration and welfare for the host economy with imperfect competition. J Reg Sci 42(2): 327–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chao CC, Yu EHS (1992) Imported materials prices, urban unemployment and welfare. Int Rev Econ Finance 1(2): 368–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chaudhuri S (2003) How and how far to liberalize a developing country with informal sector and factor market distortions. J Int Trade Econ Dev 12: 375–398Google Scholar
  9. Gu W, Yabuuchi S (2003) Local content requirements and urban unemployment. Int Rev Econ Finance 12(4): 481–494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gupta R (1995) Tax on foreign capital income and wage subsidy to the urban sector in the Harris–Todaro model. J Dev Econ 47: 469–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Harris JR, Todaro M (1970) Migration, unemployment and development: a two-sector analysis. Am Econ Rev 60: 126–142Google Scholar
  12. Hazari BR, Sgro PM (1991) Urban–rural structural adjustment, urban unemployment with traded and non-traded goods. J Dev Econ 35: 187–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Khan MA (1982) Tariffs, foreign capital and immiserizing growth with urban unemployment and specific factors of production. J Dev Econ 10: 245–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Marjit S, Beladi H (2003) Possibility or impossibility of paradoxes in the small country Harris-Todaro framework: a unified analysis. J Dev Econ 72: 379–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Neary JP (1981) On the Harris–Todaro model with intersectoral capital mobility. Economica 55: 219–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Yabuuchi S (1993) Urban unemployment, international capital mobility and development policy. J Dev Econ 41: 399–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of EconomicsAichi UniversityToyohashi, AichiJapan
  2. 2.College of BusinessUniversity of Texas at San AntonioSan AntonioUSA

Personalised recommendations