Internal Structural Changes Required by Growth and Changes in International Trade
Part of the International Economic Association Series book series (IEA)
The subject assigned to me directly involves two fields of economic research — namely, forecasting and development planning — and it requires to be shown how these are interrelated.
KeywordsComparative Advantage Factor Proportion Traditional Theory Indifference Curve Additional Demand
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.See, in particular, J. M. Letiche, Balance of Payments and Economic Growth, New York, 1959; H. B. Chenery, ‘Comparative advantage and development policy’, American Economic Review, March 1961, pp. 18–51. A good account of the theories about international specialization in general and its relationship with dynamic analysis is given by R. E. Caves in Trade and Economic Structure, Cambridge, Mass., 1960.Google Scholar
- 2.H. G. Johnson, International Trade and Economic Growth, London, 1958; M. Corden, ‘Economic Expansion and International Trade: a geometric approach’, Oxford Economic Papers, June 1956; J. Black and P. Streeten: ‘La balance commerciale, les termes de l’échange et la croissance économique Économie Appliquée, 1957, pp. 299–322.Google Scholar
- 1.H. B. Chenery, ‘Patterns of Industrial Growth’, American Economic Review, Sept. 1960, pp. 624–53.Google Scholar
- 1.H. B. Chenery, ‘Comparative Advantage and Development Policy’, American Economic Review, March 1961, p. 19.Google Scholar
- 1.J. Weiller, ‘Échanges, profits d’entreprise et gains’, Économie Appliquée, 1957, p. 327.Google Scholar
- 1.A. Lamfalussy, Investment and Growth in Mature Economics: the Case of Belgium, London, 1961.Google Scholar
- 1.R. Nurkse, ‘Patterns of Trade and Development’, 1959 Wicksell lecture; Stockholm, 1959. H. B. Chenery, ‘Comparative Advantage and Development Policy’: ‘… In short, we are forced to compare alternative patterns of growth rather than separate sectors, and we cannot expect to find simple generalisation of the Heckscher-Ohlin type concerning the characteristics of individual lines of production’; American Economic Review, March 1961, p. 23.Google Scholar
© International Economic Association 1963