Chapter 3. Applications of the Basic Model. Any country that moves from autarky to free trade can experience gains in real income. Suppose now we are already in the position of free trade equilibrium. Free trade could be measured as the matching-size trade triangle as before.
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
the Basic Model
Suppose now we are already in the position of free trade equilibrium.
Free trade could be measured as the matching-size trade triangle as before.
But, assuming home is the clothing exporter, there exists a rising net export supply curve.Review
Import demand curve shifts right.
It guarantees an increase in the relative price of exports.
Terms of trade better-off
Terms of trade=Price of Exports/Price of Imports
It raises real income at home
The increase of real income depends on (1) improvement of the TOT; (2) Increase of the export volume.An Outward Shift in Foreign Demand
The backward-bending supply curve.
Home’s real income improves, but some of these gains spill over to greater home demand for clothing.
If such an increase in home demand exceeds the greater quantity produced, a lower quantity is available for export.
It corresponds to the segment BQR in the offer curve.An Outward Shift in Foreign Demand
Special interest groups of agricultural industry could lobby for the government.
SIG gains in expenditure of the national loss.
E.g., the move from line 1 to line 2.Protection in the import-competing goods
No way when such a country is small.
A small country cannot affect the world price (see line 2)
But it is possible for a large country.
When a large country restricts imports then it could cause the world price of food importables lowered (since less demand).
Home’s terms of trade improves.
Budget line rotates from line 1 to line 3.
Representative consumers obtain higher utility.Protection in the import-competing goods
An expansion of both domestic exportable and importable could affect the world market.
Dark side: it induces a deterioration on the terms of trade.
So, to some extent, it may erode the gains from trade.
Bright side: it causes real income to rise in trading partners that are importers of the growing country’s exports.Immiserizing Growth
The growth could lower real incomes by being concentrated in domestic export sector and by significantly worsening the TOT.
Growth biased toward the nation’s export industry (clothing) can reduce real income by so worsening the TOT (from line 1 to line 2) that consumption (at D) ends up on a lower indifference curve than initially (at B).Immiserizing Growth
World’s demand elasticity for the country’s export good is quite low.
This guarantees a worse-off of terms of trade.Assumptions for Immiserizing Growth
Home is obligated to transfer money to foreign.
Franco-Prussian War in 1870-1871: France
World War I: Germany
Marshall Plan: US
Gulf War in 1991: Japan, Germany, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia to US
Southern-East Asian Crisis in 1997: IMF
How does such a transfer affect the terms of trade?Transfer Problem
Foreign could increase all demand for all goods. The demand increase of food happens to some extent.
The world demand curve for food could shift in or out.
Marginal propensities to import (m or m*)
T denotes transfer
The world demand curve for food shifts to the right iff
(1-m*)T> mTTransfer Problem
If the home makes a transfer, its real income is reduced.
But if its terms of trade improve (price of food falls), then loss will not be so severe.
The TOT moves in favor of home if the sum of import propensities satisfy: (1-m*)T < mT
Let OB denote the full compensation for the home country for the transfer.
Can the transfer shift world demand to the left sufficiently to reduce food’s price to 0B or lower?It is never better to give than to receive
Since at point B, world demand must exceed world supply.
This is because no real income in both countries will be changed if the price of food at point B.
Also, no income effect at B.
Only substitution effect exists.
Food’s lower relative price must call forth a substitution of food for clothing in both countries.
Therefore, equilibrium must be at somewhere in between AB, say, point G.
It is never better to give than to receive!It is never better to give than to receive
Two necessary assumptions:
Price above equilibrium must have excess supply higher than excess demand, and vice versa.
It is assumed that price is driven up iff the existence of excess world demand.
Consider multiple free-trade equilibrium Panel a: three equilibria
The middle equilibrium point C is unstable but is flanked by a pair of stable equilibriaEquilibrium Stability
It will jump up the food’s price, away from point C, but to D.
How about point 1?
Offer curve in panel B is also the case.
Consider price ratio curve 2, dis-equilibrium there.
TV is the excess of the home’s import demand of food over foreign supplies
Remember the green line is home offer curve.
Therefore, food’s relative price will rise, going clockwise way to the stable point I.Equilibrium Stability