1 / 31

Gains from Trade

Gains from Trade. John Ries Sauder School of Business, University of British Columbia. Gain from trade. Objectives of this session Illustrate the gains from trade based on exploiting comparative advantage

bracha
Download Presentation

Gains from Trade

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation 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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Gains from Trade John Ries Sauder School of Business, University of British Columbia

  2. Gain from trade • Objectives of this session • Illustrate the gains from trade based on exploiting comparative advantage • Show how productivity, wages, competitive advantage, and exchange rates relate to each other. • Illustrate the gains from trade based on exploiting plant-level scale economies.

  3. Your assignment: • Decide the number of workers in each of two factories (Korea & Thailand) to allocate to each of two activities (molding soles & stitching uppers). • Maximize corporate shoe output

  4. Shoe terms Upper Sole

  5. Assumptions • 300 workers in Thai factory • 300 workers in Korean factory • In the short run, you cannot add or subtract workers, or move them between plants. • One sole and one upper needed for each finished shoe. • Transport costs are negligible

  6. Productivity MatrixOutput per worker

  7. Compute total shoe output for four production plans • Plan A: (self-sufficient factories): Each country combines workers to produce completed shoes. There is no trade. • Plan B: Thailand produces only uppers, Korea produces only soles. • Plan B*: Thailand produces only uppers, Korea produces soles and uppers. • Plan C: Thailand produces only soles, Korea produces soles and uppers.

  8. Plan B* increases shoe output by 9% • (60000-55000)/55000 = .0909 • Firm-level productivity rises • from 55000/600 = 92 shoes per worker per day • to 6000/600 = 100 shoes per worker per day • No new machinery, no new skills, no extra effort. • Trade is like a new technology!

  9. Specialization is not enough • Plan C, involves specialization but it lowers output by 9% relative to Plan A. • Specialization based on comparative advantage yields gains from trade. • Comparative advantage = low opportunity costs.

  10. Opportunity cost calculations • Opportunity cost of soles in foregone uppers • Thailand: 100 U/ 100 S = 1 U/S • Korea: 200U/400S = .5 U/S • Opportunity cost of uppers in foregone soles • Thailand: 100 S/ 100 U = 1 S/U • Korea: 400S/200U = 2 S/U • Korea has lower opportunity cost of seouls!

  11. Long-run decisions • The level of employment is only fixed at 300 in each plant in the short run. • When employment is a decision variable, not a sunk cost, then wages and productivity matter.

  12. Calculate the critical wages • If wages were equal, Korea’s factory with its absolute advantage both tasks (4:1 in soles, 2:1 in uppers) would be the low cost source for both uppers and soles. • How low would Thai wages have to be justify operating the plant? (doing what?) • How low would the wage in Thailand have to be to justify shutting the Korean plant?

  13. Competitive advantage • A factory has a competitive advantage in a task when it can provide an equivalent product at a lower monetary cost than alternatives. • Competitive advantage here corresponds to lower unit labour costs. • Unit labour costs are given by wages divided by productivity.

  14. Unit Labour Costs (in baht/unit) WK= wages in Korea (won/worker) WT = wages in Thailand (baht/worker) e = exchange rate (baht/won)

  15. Thai plant gains competitive advantage • in uppers when Korea pays more than twice the Thai wage • eWK/200 > WT/100 • eWK/WT > 2 • in soles when Korea pays more than four times the Thai wage • eWK/400 > WT/100 • eWK/WT > 4

  16. Relative wages and Competitive Advantage

  17. Equilibrium relative wages: eWK/WT • Suppose wages are so high in Korea that unit labour costs are higher there than in Thailand for both goods, eWK/WT>4. • No firms would want to employ Korean workers and, hence, there would be no Korean products. Wages is Korea would fall and the won would depreciate (e=baht/won would fall). • Eventually, Korea would be low cost (have a competitive advantage) in one good (the comparative advantage good.)

  18. Competitive Advantage and Equilibrium Exchange Rates • Suppose that unions or government fix the local currency values of wages at WK = 200 Won per day and WT = 100 Baht. • What values of e (in Baht/Won) would be consistent with production in both locations? • How would the e range change if Thai productivity doubled in all activities?

  19. Lessons from the Shoe Story • Low wage countries do not “steal” all industries. • Define competitive advantage as the lowest unit labour costs. Exchange rates adjust so that a country that has a comparative advantage in a good will also have a competitive advantage in that good.

  20. Shoe Story II: Returns to Scale • Comparative advantage is not the only way to obtain gains from trade. • Plant-level economies of scale (PLEoS) are important in many industries. • To illustrate the gains from exploiting PLEoS through trade, we revise the story to exclude comparative advantage and absolute advantage.

  21. New Productivity Matrix

  22. Indivisible Overhead • Factory workers are supported by services of non-production employees, also known as “overhead” • Accounting • Logistics and input procurement • Machinery maintenance • Some minimum number of overhead workers are required for any positive level of production.

  23. New example • Let overhead be 30 workers per “product” (soles or uppers) per plant. • A factory that produces both products (that is, a factory that is not fully specialized) has overhead of 30+30=60, leaving 300-60=240 workers for production. • A factory that specializes has 300-30=270 workers for production.

  24. Plan A vs Plan B revisited • Plan A (self-sufficiency): • Sole output in each factory: (240/2)*100 = 12000 • Upper output in each factory: (240/2)*100 = 12000 • Combined output = 2*12000=24000 shoes • Plan B (full specialization, KS,TU): • Sole output in Korea: 270*100 = 27000 • Upper output in Thailand: 270*100 =27000 • Combined output = 2700 shoes (11% gain!)

  25. PLEoS gains are differentfrom CA gains • Plan C (full specialization KU and TS) is just as good (2700 shoes) as plan B • No such thing as specializing in the “wrong” thing in this case. • The key for PLEoS is to avoid duplicative overhead, rather than to “match” products with skills (as in the CA case)

  26. Geometric PLEoS • Surface to volume ratios of three dimensional objects are a source of PLEoS. • The formula for the surface to volume ratio of a vat is decreasing in the volume (see EMS, p.35). Thus, as the vat size increases, the per volume cost of the material to make the vat (steel) is falling • Geometric PLEoS apply to vats, tanks, furnaces, and even buildings

  27. Two-way trade and scale economies • Recall, Canada is both a big exporter and a big importer of cars, machinery, and industrial equipment • This can be explained by companies producing product varieties and concentrating individual varieties in single factories

  28. Before Canada-US Autopact (1965) Minivans Sedans Local sales Canada US Minivans Sedans Local sales

  29. After Canada-US Autopact (1965) Canada Minivans Local sales Canadian imports Canadian exports US Sedans Local sales

  30. Benefits • Plant-level fixed costs are eliminated by concentrating individual varieties in single factories • Would a cost-minimizing firm prefer to locate both factories in the United States? • Yes, transport costs are minimized by locating in the large market.

More Related