International Trade Theory.

1. LECTURE NOTES
in
INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS (*)
(I)
(ECON301/331/332)
Cevat Gerni
Beykent University/İstanbul
2010
(*) These lecture notes mostly depend on the textbooks of Dominick Salvatore (International
Economics, 9e), Paul R.Krugman & Maurice Obstfeld (International Economics, 3e) and Halil
Seyidoğlu (Uluslararası İktisat, 17e), with our own contributions.
1

2. Contents
1 Introduction
1.1 The Scope of International Economics
1.2 International Economics: Trade and Money
1.3 Why is some knowledge of international economics required?
1.4 Historical Development of International Trade Theory (Table 1)
2 The Law of Comparative Advantage
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Mercantilism
2.3 Trade Based on Absolute Advantage: Adam Smith
2.4 Trade Based on Comparative Advantage: David Ricardo
2.5 Critics of Ricardo’s Comparative Advantages
2.6 Exception to The Law of Comparative Advantage
2.7 The Opportunity Cost and Comparative Advantages (Gottfried
Haberler)
2.8 Empirical Tests of Ricardian Model
3 The Standard Theory of International Trade
3.1 Introduction
3.2 The Production Frontier with Increasing Costs
3.3 Equilibrium in Isolation with Increasing Costs (In a Closed
Economy)
3.4 The Basis For and The Gains From Trade with Increasing Costs
3.5 The Gains From Exchange and From Specialization
3.6 Trade Based on Differences in Tastes
4 Offer Curves, Demand and Supply, The Terms of Trade
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Illustration of Offer Curves
5 Factor Endowments and The Heckscher-Ohlin Theory
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Illustration of the H-O Theory
5.3 Corollaries of the H-O Theory
2

3. 5.4 Empirical Tests of the Heckscher-Ohlin Model
5.5 The New Trade Theories
5.6 Synthesis of Trade Theories
5.7 Transportation Costs and International Trade
5.8 Environmental Standards and International Trade
6 Economic Growth and International Trade
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Interaction Between Growth and Trade
6.3 Comparative Advantages and Economic Development
Chapter One
INTRODUCTION
3

4. 1.1 The Scope of International Economics
This course deals with the main concepts and methods of International Economics
Examples for some concepts and subjects of International Economics:
 Trade between independent nations
 Tariffs and quotas
 Exchange rates
 Balance of payments
 Economic Integrations
 Capital inflows and outflows
And like…
International Economics uses the ‘same fundamental methods of analysis’ as other branches
of economics, because the ‘motives’ and ‘behavior’ of individuals and firms are the same in
international trade as they are in domestic transactions.
Yet, International Economics involves ‘new and different’ concerns, because international
trade and investment occur between independent nations.
For example,
 Chine’s toys can become more expensive in Turkey if Turkey sets a quota that limits
imports.
 If interest rates in Turkey fall, capital outflows may occur and the value of dollar in
terms of TL may rise.
Then, the subject matter of International Economics consists of issues raised by the special
problems of economic interaction between sovereign states.
4

5. Seven themes recur throughout the subject:
The Gains From Trade
The Pattern of Trade
Protectionism
The Balance of Payments
Exchange Rate Determination
International Policy Coordination
International Capital Market
5

6. i. The Gains From Trade
Probably the most important insight in all of International Economics is the idea that ‘there
are gains from trade.’
That is, that when countries sell goods and services to another, this is almost always ‘to their
mutual benefit.’
Many people are skeptical about the benefits of trade, but the range of circumstances under
which international trade is beneficial is much wider than most people appreciate.
(will be discussed in detail later.)
ii. The Pattern of Trade
‘Who sells what to whom?’ This summarizes the pattern of trade, which have been a major
preoccupation of international economists.
The reasons behind the trade might be:
 Differences in climate and natural resources
 Differences in labor productivity (D.Ricardo)
 Relative supplies of national resources such as capital, labor, and land on one side and
relative use of these factors in the production of different goods on the other.
 A random component such as economies of scale, and external economies.
(will be discussed in detail later.)
iii. Protectionism
If the idea of gains from trade is the most important theoretical concept in International
Economics, the seemingly eternal battle between free trade and protection is its most
important policy theme.
Limits on imports and subsidizing exports are devices of protectionist policies.
International Economics analyzes the effects of these protectionist policies. And usually,
though not always, it criticizes protectionism and shows the advantages of freer international
trade. (These devices will be analyzed)
6

7. iv. The Balance of Payments
Some countries run large ‘trade surpluses’ -that is, each sells more goods to the rest of the
world than it buys in return, like Japan.
On the other side, some countries run large ‘trade deficits’ -that is, each buy more goods from
the rest of the world than it sells, like Turkey.
What does it mean when a country runs a trade surplus or a trade deficit?
To make sense of numbers like the trade deficit, it is essential to place them in the broader
context of the whole of a nation’s international transactions.
The record of a country’s transactions with the rest of the world is called ‘the balance of
payments.’
Explaining the balance of payments and diagnosing its significance is a main theme of
international economics.
The balance of payments has become a central issue for Turkey because the nation has run
huge trade deficits for a long time.
v. Exchange Rate Determination
In February 2001, a dollar was worth about 1500 Turkish Liras. During the following years a
dollar fell up to TL 1200, and this year fluctuated between 1300 and 1700. These changes
have many effects far beyond financial markets.
Exports, imports, industrial efficiency, foreign direct investments, saving behavior, etc are
affected by the value of Turkish Lira in terms of other currencies.
One of the key differences between International Economics and other areas of Economics
is that countries have different currencies.
Exchange rate can be fixed by government action (fixed Exchange rate regime) or can be
determined in the market place (floating Exchange rate regime)
For the time being, however, some of the world’s most important exchange rates fluctuate
minute by minute and the role of changing exchange rates remains at the center of the
international economics story.
7

8. vi. International Policy Coordination
The international economy comprises of sovereign nations, each free to choose its own
economic policies.
Unfortunately, in an integrated world economy, one country’s economic policies usually
affect other countries as well.
For example:
 When the United States imposed a tariff on imports of lumber during 1986, the
Canadian Lumber Industry experienced a crisis.
 The FED’s interest rate policy is very important for the policy actions of other
governments.
Therefore, differences in goals between countries often lead to conflicts of interest. Even
when countries have similar goals, they may suffer losses if they fail to coordinate their
policies.
While cooperation on international trade policies is a well-established tradition, coordination
of international macroeconomic policies is a newer and more uncertain topic.
vii. International Capital Market
The debt problems of developing countries (especially Latin Americans) during 1970s, 1980s
and 1990s brought the public attention to the growing importance of the international capital
market.
The growing importance of international trade has been accompanied by the growth in the
‘International Capital Market’ which links the capital markets of individual countries.
‘Some special risks’ are also associated with international capital markets; currency
fluctuations, national default...
So, the growing importance of international capital markets and their new problems
demand greater attention than even before.
8

9. 1.2 International Economics: Trade and Money
The economics of international economy can be divided into two broad subfields.
• The study of International Trade
• The study of International Money
International trade analysis focuses primarily on the ‘real transactions’ in the international
economy (that is, physical movements of goods).
International monetary analysis focuses on the ‘monetary side’ of the international economy
(that is, on financial transactions such as foreign purchases of U.S. dollars on Turkish Lira)
In the real world, there is no simple dividing line between trade and monetary issues. Most
international trade involves monetary transactions, while many monetary events have
important consequences for trade.
Nonetheless, the distinction between international trade and international money is useful.
In accordance with this distinction we will,
at first, study international trade theories and policies;
secondly, we will study international monetary theory and policy issues.
Before starting the analysis of international trade theories, it might be useful to have a look at
the historical development of international trade theory as a whole (see Table 1).
1.3 Why is some knowledge of international economics required?
Because, first, it is necessary to understand what goes on in the world today and to be
informed consumers, citizens, and voters.
Second, on a more practical level, the study of international economics is required for
numerous jobs in multinational corporations, international banking, government agencies, and
international organizations.
9

10. 10

11. Table 1
1.4 Historical Development of International Trade Theory
Theory of Absolute Theory of Extension of Factor Some Theorems Leontief Paradox New Theories
Advantage Comparative Theory With New Proportions Depending on H-O
Advantage Concepts Theory (Hecksher- Model
Ohlin Model)
-Adam Smith, ‘The Wealth -David Ricardo - Opportunity Cost -Why does a -Equalization of -The results of -Skilled Labor
of Nations’ (1776) ‘On The Principals country have international factor Wassily Leontief’s Hypothesis
of Political -International comparative prices Studies (1951) and
-Classical Liberalism Economy and relative prices advantage? others stimulated -Technological Gap
• Homoeconomicus Taxation’(1817) (Reciprocal -Income Distribution new theories. Hypothesis
Demand -Resources / Factor Theorem of Stolper- (He devised input-
• Laissez faire Samuelson
laissez passer -Even if a country Curves/Offer Endowments are output analysis and -Product Cycle
(Free trade policy is
• Invisible Hand has advantage on Curves) emphasized. tested H-O Theory) Model
in favor of abundant
producing of the
factor, but
-Advantages of two goods, trade -Economic growth Eli Hecksher, protectionism is in -Similarity in
specialization and division can be possible and and foreign trade Swedish, his article favor of scarce Preferences
of labor are emphasized. two sides can gain ‘The Effect of factor.) Hypothesis
from trade. Foreign Trade on
-It is not adequate to explain The Distribution of -Rybczynski -The Theorem of
the trade. But has -The theory Income’(1919); Theorem Economies of Scale
importance for being the depends mainly on (Under full
first attempt. the differences of Bertil Ohlin’s book, employment -The Theorem of
labor productivity. ‘Inter-regional conditions, if the Monopolistic
-Countries producing more Trade and supply of one factor Competition
-Has been International increases, the
efficiently should sell.
developed with the Trade’(1933) production of the
contribution of new good which uses that
-Trade would be factor increases, but
unilateral/one-sided concepts.
the production of
other good
decreases.)
11

12. Chapter Two
THE LAW OF COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE
2.1 Introduction
We will start with the simplest model and develop it with extentions and additions.
The basic questions are:
1) What is the ‘basis for trade?’
A nation will voluntarily engage in trade if it benefits from trade.
2) What are the ‘gains from trade’?
But, how are gains from trade generated? And, how large are the gains and how
are they divided among the trading nations?
We will see, successively:
 Mercantilism
 Adam Smith’s theory of ‘Absolute Advantage’
 David Ricardo’s theory of ‘Comparative Advantage’
 Gottfried Haberler’s ‘Opportunity Cost’ Theory, as a contribution to comparative
advantages.
2.2 Mercantilism
• During 17th and 18th centuries mercantilism was the popular economic philosophy.
• Briefly, the mercantilists maintained that the way for a nation to become ‘rich’ and
‘powerful’ was to export more than it imported.
• According to Mercantilists, the source of power and richness was to accumulate
precious metals, primarily gold and silver.
• For that reason, the government had to stimulate the nation’s exports and restrict
imports.
• Thus, the mercantilists preached ‘economic nationalism’.
• But, since all nations could not simultaneously have an export surplus and the amount
of gold and silver was fixed at any particular point in time, one nation could gain only at
the expense of other nations.
12

13. • Consequently, trade was a ‘zero-sum game’: one part gains, but the other loses!
2.3 Trade Based on Absolute Advantage: Adam Smith
Economics as an organized science can be said to have originated with the publication in 1776
of ‘The Wealth of Nations’ by Adam Smith.
Smith started with the simple truth that for two nations to trade with each other ‘voluntarily’,
both nations ‘must gain’.
And the questions:
• How does this ‘mutually beneficial trade’ take place? and
• From where do these ‘gains from trade’ come?
2.3a Absolute Advantage:
• According to Smith, trade between two nations is based on ‘absolute advantage’.
• According to the theory of absolute advantage, when one nation is more efficient than
the other in the production of one commodity, it should specialize in producing this
commodity and export the surplus over its need.
In return, this nation can buy (import) the commodity which is the surplus of the other
nation’s production that is generated by the specialization of this nation.
Thus,
Two nations allocate their resources so as to produce most efficiently.
And free trade would cause world resources to be utilized most efficiently and would
maximize world welfare.
• This is the policy of ‘Laissez-faire’ (There were to be only a few exceptions to this
policy of Laissez-faire and free trade; e.g. the protection of industries important for
national defense.)
13

14. 2.3b Illustration of Absolute Advantage
Table 2.1 one hour of labor time
U.S. U.K.
Wheat (bushels*/man-hour) 6 1
Cloth (yards**/man-hour) 4 5
*bushel: a unit of measure, approximately 8 gallons (36lt); Kile
**yard: 3 feets/36 inch; or 0.91 m (1 feet: 30.5cm, 1 inch: 2.54 cm)
From the table, we can see that;
 One hour of labor time produces 6 units of wheat in the U.S., but only 1 unit of wheat
in the U.K.
 On the other hand, one hour of labor time produces 5 units of cloth in the U.K., but
only 4 units of cloth in the U.S.
 Thus, the U.S. has an absolute advantage over the U.K. in the production of wheat (or
is more efficient than the U.K.)
And, the U.K. has an absolute advantage over the U.S. in the production of cloth (or is
more efficient than the U.S.)
With trade,
 the U.S. would specialize in the production of wheat, and exchange part of it for
British cloth. The opposite is true for the U.K.
 Now, let’s assume that the U.S. gives up to produce cloth (C) and specializes in the
production of wheat (W); producing for example 12 units of wheat.
 If the U.S. exchanges 6 units of W for 6 units of British C, then the U.S. gains 2 C.
6 C (imported)- 4 C (domestically produced) = 2 C
Similarly,
 6 W ( the U.K. receives from the U.S.) = 6 man-hours for the U.K.
With 6 man-hours, the U.K. can produce 30 C (=6 man-hours x 5 C).
So, the U.K. gains 24 C (30 C- 6C=24 C)
14

15.  In this example, no matter how much more one nation (the U.K.) gained
than the other nation (the U.S.).
What is important is that ‘both’ nations can gain from specialization in production and
trade.
 However, in the example above, if the U.S. was efficient in the production of both
wheat and cloth, the trade could not be possible because the U.K. could not gain from
trade.
 Absolute advantage can explain only a very small part of world trade today, such as
some of the trade between developed and developing countries.
It remained for David Ricardo to explain the basis for and the gains from trade: The Law of
Comparative Advantage.
2.4 Trade Based on Comparative Advantage: David Ricardo
Definition: According to the law of comparative advantage, even if one nation is less efficient
than the other nation in the production of ‘both’ commodities, there is still a basis for
mutually beneficial trade.
In other words, one nation may have an absolute disadvantage with respect to the other
nation, but they can gain from trade.
Let’s look at the example given by Ricardo:
Table 2.2 Commodities produced with one labor-day
Cloth (meter) Wine (liter) The U.K.
has an
U.K. 80 40 absolute
advantage
Portugal 10 20 for C&W
But, in cloth, U.K. Labor is 8 times productive; and in wine, U.K. labor is 2 times
productive.
It is said that Portugal has a comparative advantage in wine and the U.K. has a
comparative advantage in cloth.
In other words, the U.K.’s absolute advantage is greater in cloth, so the U.K. has a
comparative advantage in cloth.
15

16. The Gains from Trade:
Now look at the domestic prices. (Note that prices are relative in terms of other commodity:
terms of trade domestically)
Domestic Prices in the U.K.: 1 unit of cloth= 1/2 units of wine (1C=1/2W)
Domestic Prices in Portugal: 1 unit of cloth= 2 units of wine (1C=2W)
Domestic Prices are different. The difference in domestic prices is a base for trade.
(Assuming no transportation costs)
For example, say, current world price is as follows:
1 unit of cloth= 1 unit of wine (1C=1W)
Then, how much do the trading nations gain? = world price- domestic cost
The U.K. gains ½ W.
Because 1C (Export) is exchanged for 1W (Import), then 1W- ½ W (domestic cost) = 1/2 W
Portugal gains 1/2 C.
Because 1W (exports) is exchanged for 1C (imports); then 1C-1/2 C (domestic cost) = 1/2C
2.5 Critics of Ricardo’s Comparative Advantages
Of course, although Ricardo’s theory of comparative advantage is a very challenging one with
practical applications, it is not perfect.
It has been criticized in some aspects:
 The theory considers only the labor productivity. Whereas, there are other resources
used in production process such as capital, land, etc.
 The theory does not explain the difference in labor productivities.
 It assumes that labor is domestically mobile, but immobile between countries.
 It is a supply theory. Whereas, the demand side should be considered.
16

17.  It depends on constant costs and complete specialization. Whereas, increasing costs
and incomplete specialization are more realistic in the world of today.
 It is a static model. It does not consider the changes over time. This criticism is
especially important to developing countries.
 It does not take the production processes into consideration in the world of today.
Trade between industrialized countries is mostly of intra-industry character (not only
inter-industry). Intra-industry trade means the trade among similar industries.
2.6 Exception to the Law of Comparative Advantage
There is one exception to the law of comparative advantage but not very common.
This occurs when the absolute disadvantage that one nation has with respect to another nation
is the ‘same’ in both commodities.
For example, let us reorganize Table 2.2 as below:
Table 2.3 Commodities produced with one labor-day
Cloth (meter) Wine (liter)
U.K. 80 40
Portugal 10 5
If, with one labor day, Portugal produced 5 units of wine, Portugal could be exactly one-eight
as productive as the U.K. in both cloth and wine.
The U.K. and Portugal would then have a comparative advantage in either commodity, and
no mutually beneficial trade could take place.
This requires slightly modifying the statement of the law of comparative advantage to
read as follows:
17

18. Even if one nation has an absolute disadvantage with respect to the other nation in the
production of both commodities, there is still a basis for mutually beneficial trade, ‘unless
the absolute disadvantage (that one nation has with respect to the other nation) is in the
same proportion for the two commodities.’
While it is important to note this exception in theory, its occurrence is rare and a matter of
coincidence, so that the applicability of the law of comparative advantage is not much
affected.
Furthermore, natural ‘trade barriers’ such as transportation costs can preclude trade even
when some comparative advantage exists.
2.7 The Opportunity Cost and Comparative Advantages
(Gottfried Haberler)
Ricardo based his law of comparative advantage on a number of assumptions:
1. Only two nations and two commodities,
2. Free trade,
These 3. Perfect mobility of labor within each nation but immobility between the two
assumptions nations,
can easily
be relaxed! 4. Constant costs of production,
5. No transportation costs,
6. No technical change,
7. The labor theory of value. (But this assumption is not ‘valid’ and should not
be used for explaining comparative advantage)
According to the Labor Theory of Value, the value or price of a commodity depends
exclusively on the amount of labor going into the production of the commodity.
This implies:
1. that either labor is the only factor of production or labor is used in the ‘same’ fixed
proportion in the production of all commodities.
2. that labor is homogenous (i.e., of only one type)
18

19. Since neither of these assumptions is true, we cannot base the explanation of comparative
advantage on the labor theory of value.
It was left for Gottfried Haberler in 1936 to explain or base the theory of comparative
advantage on the ‘opportunity cost theory’. In this form, the law of comparative advantage is
sometimes referred to as ‘the law of comparative cost’.
According to the opportunity cost theory, the cost of a commodity is the amount of a
second commodity that must be given up to release ‘just enough resources’ to produce one
additional unit of the first commodity. ‘Just enough resources’, here, imply some cost!
In this case, we can write the costs of commodities in terms of national currencies, and
later convert them into relative commodity prices (Table 2.4)
Table 2.4 Domestic Prices (in terms of national currencies)
For 1 unit of
Steel* Wheat*
In Turkey 10 TL 1 TL
In the U.S. 1$ 1$
*: It requires some resources of
These costs can be stated as relative commodity prices as follows:
Opportunity
In Turkey: 1 unit of steel = 10 units of wheat
cost
domestically
In the U.S.: 1 unit of steel =1 unit of wheat
In Turkey, WHEAT is cheap Turkey specializes in WHEAT
In U.S., STEEL is cheap The U.S. specializes in STEEL
In this case they trade and gain from trade!
How do this trade and gains from trade occur? To understand the case, we first should recall
the production possibility frontier.
19

20. 2.7a the Production Possibility Frontier under Constant Returns
(The following explanation is just that of Salvatore, page 44-48)
Definition: ‘The production possibility frontier’ is a curve that shows the alternative
combinations of the two commodities that a nation can produce by fully utilizing all of its
resources with the best technology available to it.
Table 2.5 Production Possibility Schedules for Wheat and Cloth in The U.S. and U.K.
United States United Kingdom
Wheat Cloth Wheat Cloth
180 0 60 0
150 20 50 20
120 40 40 40
90* 60* 30** 60**
60 80 20 80
30 100 10 100
0 120 0 120
*: (90, 60) represents Point A in the figure below.
**: (30, 60) represents Point A’ in the figure below.
From figure 2.1 and Table 2.5, we see that the United States should give up 30 units of wheat
Cloth Production
if it wants to increase 20 units of cloth (from 180 W to 150 W, from 0 C to 20 C, from 150 W
Figure 2.1 Production Frontiers
to 120 W, from 20 Constant Returns
under C to 40 C, etc.)
U.S.
For the U.S., note that for every 20 C it requires 30 W to give up for the U.K. In other
U.S.
1WW,2/3C
words, for each 1 = it requires 2/3 C to give up.
1W = 2C
120 120
100 100
This means that “the cost of 1 unit of Wheat is 2/3 units of Cloth in the United States.”
Cloth
80 80
On A
60 the other hand, for the U.K., note that for every 40 C it requires 20 W to give up.
60
40
A’
In the 40
other words, for each 1 W it requires 2 C to give up.
20 20
This means that “the cost of 1 unit of wheat is 2 units of cloth in The United Kingdom.” (1 W
= 2 C)
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 0 20 40 60
This case is called constant opportunity cost, because the cost of 1 W does not
Wheat Production Wheat
change “no matter from which point on its production possibility frontier the Nation
starts.”
20

21. Why do constant opportunity costs arise?
They arise when;
(1) resources or factors of production are either
- ‘perfect substitutes for each other’ or
- ‘used in fixed proportion in the production of both
commodities’.
(2) all units of the same factor are homogeneous or of exactly the same
quality.
21

22. Figure 2.2 Graphical illustrations of the gains from trade under constant returns
Cloth
180
U.S. Cloth U.K.
120 B’
120
X
E
A
C2 70 M
C1 60 C’2 50 E’
M C’1 40
A’
X
B
0 90 110 180
0 40 60 70 120
W1 W2 Wheat
W’1 W’2 Wheat
22

23. Now, to be noted is that by each nation specializing in the production of the commodity it
has comparative advantage the total production of world increases and also the two nations
end up consuming more than before trade (as shown in Table 2.5).
In the absence of trade, In the absence of trade,
Production and consumption point is ; Production and consumption point is ;
Production 90W = 0W1 Production & Consumption Production 40W’ = 0W’1 Production & Consumption
And of the nation depend on the And of the nation depend on the
consumption 60C = 0C1 people’s tastes ,or demand consumption 60C’1 = 0C’1 people’s tastes ,or demand
considerations considerations
(The Nation chooses point A) (The Nation chooses point A’)
If trade possible for 1 W = 1 C internationally Similarly, if trade possible for 1W=1C
internationally
The U.S. might choose point E
( might want to exchange 70 W for 70 C ; The U.K. might choose point E`
chooses E ) (might want to exchange 70 W for 70 C );
Then,
Production ; 180 W = 0B ; 0C
(no cloth production ) Production ; 120 C =0B`; 0W
(no wheat production)
Consumption ; 110 W = 0W2 >0W1
(110 – 90 = 20 W ) Consumption; 50C=0C2`>0C1` (50-40 = 10C)
Export ; 70 W (180 – 110 ) Export ; 120-50 =70C
Import = consumption of cloth; Import = consumption wheat;
70C = 0C2>0C1 (70-60 =10C) 70W= 0W2`>0W1` (70-40=30W)
“With trade, The U.S. gained 20 W and 10 C”. “With trade The U.K. gained 10C and 30W.”
EW2B is called ‘foreign trade triangle.’ E`C2`B` is the foreign trade triangle of The U.K.
Vertical axis shows import,
Horizontal axis shows export,
23
Hypotenuse shows “rate of exchange.” /
‘relative prices’ /
‘terms of trade’

24. Table 2.5 Increases in the World Production and Consumption after Trade
World Production Before Trade After Trade
U.S U.K Total U.S U.K Total
Wheat 90 40 130 180 0 180
Cloth 60 40 100 0 120 120
World Consumption Before Trade After Trade
U.S U.K Total U.S U.K Total
Wheat 90 40 130 110 70 180
Cloth 60 40 100 70 50 120
2.8 Empirical Tests of the Ricardian Model
→ Various tests were conducted for the validity of Ricardian simple model.
G.D.A. Mac Dougall (in1951, 1952), Bela Balassa (in 1963), R.M. Stern (in 1962), S.S.
Golub (in1995), S.S. Golub and C.T. Hsieh (in 2000) studied the theory empirically.
→ The Ricardian trade model has to a large extent been empirically verified.
→ Despite this, it has a serious shortcoming in that it “assumes” rather than “explains”
comparative advantage.
→ The model explains NEITHER the reason for the differences in labor productivity across
nations NOR the effect of international trade on the earnings of factors.
→ By providing answers to both of these important questions, The Hecksher-Ohlin model
theoretically improves upon Ricardian Model.
24

25. Chapter Three
THE STANDARD THEORY of INTERNATIONAL TRADE
3.1 Introduction
→ By ‘The Standard Theory’ we mean the extension of the model with the more realistic
case of ‘increasing opportunity costs.’
→ We consider ‘tastes or demand preferences’, represented by ‘community
indifference curves’
→ So, together with production possibility curve (supply force) and community
preferences (demand force), we will drive the equilibrium relative price in each nation
in the absence of trade under increasing costs. (This will also indicate the commodity of
comparative advantage for each nation)
→ Subsequently, we examine how, with trade, each nation gains by specializing in the
production of the commodity of its comparative advantage.
→ Also, we’ll see a special case; how mutually beneficial trade is possible even when
two nations are exactly alike except for tastes under increasing costs.
3.2 The Production Frontier with Increasing Costs
It is more realistic for a nation to face increasing rather than constant opportunity costs.
Increasing opportunity costs mean that the nation must give up more and more of one
commodity to release just enough resources to produce each additional unit of another
commodity.
Increasing opportunity costs result in a production frontier (production
Figure 3.1 a possibility curve) that is concave from the origin (Figure 3.1a).
Nation 1
Y
Nation 1 incurs increasing opportunity costs in the
A production of both commodities.
Y1
B
Y2
C For each additional unit of X commodity, Nation 1 must
Y3
D
give up more and more Y. ( Y1< Y2< Y3 )
X 25
0 1 2 3 4

26. This is also valid when each additional unit of Y is increased.
Figure 3.1 b
Y Nation 2
Nation 2 incurs increasing costs in the production of Y.
5
4 X3 For each additional unit of Y commodity, Nation 2 must
3 give up more and more X.
X2
( X1< X2< X3 )
2 X1
1
0 X
3.2a The Marginal Rate of Transformation (MRT)
→ The marginal rate of transformation of X for Y refers to the amount of Y that a nation
must give up to produce each additional unit of X.
→ Thus, MRT is another name for the opportunity cost of X, and is given by the
(absolute) slope of the production frontier at the point of production.
In Figure 3.1a, if the slope of the production frontier (MRT) of Nation 1 at point A is 1/4, this
means that Nation 1 must give up 1/4 of a unit of Y to release just enough resources to
produce one additional unit of X at this point.
Similarly, if the slope, or MRT, equals 1 at point B, this means that Nation 1 must give up one
unit of Y to produce one additional unit of X at this point.
→ Thus, a movement from point A down to point B along the production frontier of
Nation1 involves an increase in the slope and reflects the increasing opportunity costs
in producing more X.
→ In contrast, in the case of constant opportunity costs the MRT is constant, as seen in
Figure 2.1.
26

27. 3.2b Reasons for Increasing Opportunity Costs and Different Production
Frontiers
→ How do increasing costs arise?
→ Why are they more realistic than constant opportunity costs?
Because;
1) Resources or factors of production are not homogenous. That is, all units of the
same factor are not identical or of the same equality (no perfect substitution)
2) Resources or factors of production are not used in the same fixed proportion or
intensity in the production of all commodities.
This means that as the nation produces more of a commodity, it must utilize
resources that become progressively ‘less efficient’ or ‘less suited’ for the production of that
commodity.
For instance, suppose some of a nation’s land is flat and suited for growing wheat, and
some is hilly and better suited for grazing and milk production. The nation originally
specialized in wheat but now wants to concentrate on producing milk. By transferring its hilly
areas from wheat growing to grazing, the nation gives up very little wheat and obtains a great
deal of milk. Thus, the opportunity cost of milk in terms of the amount of wheat given up is
initially small. But if this transfer process continues, eventually flat land, which is better
suited for wheat growing, will have to be used for grazing. As a result, the opportunity cost of
milk will rise and the production frontier will be concave from the origin.
Note that the production frontiers of Nation 1 and Nation 2 in figure 3.1 have different
factor endowments and / or use different technologies in production.
In the real world, the production frontiers of different nations will usually differ,
since practically no two nations have identical factor endowments (even if they could
have access to the same technology).
27

28. 3.2c Community Indifference Curves
So far, we have discussed production, or supply, considerations in a nation.
Now, we introduce the demand considerations (or tastes) in a nation. These are given by
community indifference curves (or social indifference curves).
Definition: ‘A community indifference curve shows the various combinations of two
commodities that yield equal satisfaction to the community or nation.’
→ Higher curves refer to greater satisfaction, lower curves refer to less
satisfaction.
→ Community indifference curves are negatively sloped and convex from the
origin.
→ To be useful, they must not cross.
Illustration of Indifference Curves
Figure 3.2a Figure 3.2b
28

29. Y
T
E
N H III
A II
I
X
0 Nation 1
Y
H’ E’
A’
III’
II’
R’
I’
X
0 Nation 2
Here, tastes (or demand preferences) are different in the two nations.
Points N and A give equal satisfaction to Nation 1, since they are both on the same
indifference curve (I).
Points T and H refer to a higher level of satisfaction, since they are on a higher
indifference curve (II).
Even though T involves more of Y but less of X than A, satisfaction is greater at T
because it is on Indifference Curve II.
Point E refers to still greater satisfaction, since it is on indifference curve III.
29

30. Then, N=A<T=H<E; and for Nation 2, A`=R`<H`<E`
→ The community indifference curves are negatively sloped. It implies that if the
nation wants to consume more of X, it must consume less of Y, remaining on
the same level of satisfaction.
The Marginal Rate of Substitution (MRS)
 The marginal rate of substitution (MRS) of X for Y in consumption refers to the
amount of Y that a nation could give up for one extra unit of X and still remains on the
same indifference curve.
 This is given by the (absolute) slope of the community indifference curve at the point
of consumption and declines as the nation moves down the curve. Because, the
marginal utility of commodity X decreses more and more as the commodity is used
more and more.
Figure 3.2 c
Y
tan A> tan B means that the slope at point N is
higher than the slope at point A.
N opposite rise
A (Tangent is measured as ˗˗˗˗˗˗˗˗˗˗˗˗ = ˗˗˗˗˗˗˗˗˗˗ )
adjacent run
tan A tan B (The position of an indifference curve represents
X for what commodity the society demands more.
The slope represents the degree of substitution.)
 Declining MRS means that community indifference curves are convex from the
origin.
 Thus, while increasing opportunity cost in production is reflected in concave
production frontiers; a declining marginal rate of substitution in consumption is
reflected in convex indifference curves.
30

31.  This convexity property of indifference curves is necessary to reach a unique
equilibrium consumption point for the nation
3.3 Equilibrium in Isolation with Increasing Costs (In a Closed Economy)
Figure 3.3 a Figure 3.3 b
Y
Nation 1
Nation 1
A I
I
60
PA=1/4
PA=1/4
X
50 130 X
50 130
Y
PA’=4 Nation 2
40 A’
I’
X
80
→ Nation 1 is in equilibrium, or maximizes its welfare, in isolation by producing
and consuming at point A, where its production frontier reaches, or is tangent
to, indifference curve I (the highest possible).
31

32. → Similarly, Nation 2 is in equilibrium at point A’, where its production frontier
is tangent to indifference curve I’.
→ The equilibrium relative price of X in Nation 1 is given by the slope of the
common tangent to its production frontier and indifference curve I at point A.
This is PA=1/4 for Nation 1, PA’= 4 for Nation 2
 Since the relative price of X is lower in Nation 1 than in Nation 2, Nation 1 has a
comparative advantage in commodity X, and Nation 2 has a comparative advantage
in commodity Y.
3.4 The Basis For and the Gains from Trade with Increasing Costs
Now, suppose that the world (equilibrium) relative price is 1Y=1X
We know that, in Nation 1, 1/4 Y=1X
→ If Nation 1 can exchange 1X for more than 1/4 Y, it wants to specialize in X
production.
→ But as long as Nation 1 specialize in X production, the opportunity cost of X will
rise.
→ Nation 1 will specialize in X production up to the point where 1X is exchanged for
1Y. This point is B in figure 3.4 a.
Figure 3.4 a
32

33. 1) Point A
Nation 1
represents
Y
the
E
(80) Y3 III
A
I
Y1
C B
(20) Y2
PB=1
X1 X3 X2
0
(70) (130)
equilibrium in isolation. In this case, Nation 1 consumes the amount of X and Y that
it produces (that is, X1 and Y1).
2) With trade, Nation 1 moves from point A to point B in production. By then
exchanging 60X for 60Y with Nation 2, Nation 1 ends up consuming at point E (on
indifference curve III). It represents a higher welfare level.
(After trade, Nation 1 changed its production and consumption combinations.)
3) The trade triangle is ECB.
X
4) The key point here is that the specialization is incomplete. Nation 1 still produces the
two goods, but it produces more commodity X (X2) than commodity Y (Y2). It
consumes some X (X3), and sell the amount not used (X3- X2=CB); in return, it buys
commodity Y (Y2-Y3=EC).
Similarly, we can analyze the case of Nation 2, as illustrated in Figure 3.4 b.
Figure 3.4 b
Nation 2
33

34. Y 1) A’ is the
point where
production
B' and
consumption
of Nation 2
are in
C'
isolation.
E'
III'
A'
2) With trade,
PB=1
I' production
120
moves from
X point A’ to
X2 X1 X3 point B’.
(40) (80) (100)
60 3) Consumptio
Y1
0 n moves
from point
A’ to point
E’, which
represents a
higher
welfare level.
4) The trade triangle is C’E’B’.
5) B’C’ is the export of Nation 2.
6) C’E’ is the import of Nation 2,
7) The hypotenuse of the trade triangle
(B’E’) represents the world relative
commodity price.
8) PB is the ‘equilibrium-relative commodity price with trade’.
9) Also note that specialization is ‘incomplete’.
 As the result of these analyses, these two nations want to trade at an equilibrium-
relative commodity world price that is higher than domestic relative commodity
prices of these two nations.
34

35. 3.5 The Gains from Exchange and From Specialization
Figure 3.5
Nation 1
A nation’s gains from trade can be broken into two components:
Y3 E
T U10
Y2
U7
Y1 C A U5
PD=1/4
B
Y4 F P*W=1
PW=1
0 X2 X1 X3 X4
1) The gains from ‘exchange’, and
2) The gains from ‘specialization’.
This breakdown is illustrated in Figure 3.5.
From A to T (Gains from exchange)
From A to E (Gains from specialization)
→ Suppose that, for whatever reason, Nation 1 could not specialize in the
production of X with the opening of trade but continued to produce at point A.
- Point A shows both producing and consuming combinations (in isolation)
- Pd (=1/4) is the relative domestic price.
→ Let us assume that Pw (=1) represents the world relative price.
Accordingly, Pw* also represents the world relative price.
→ Because Pw (=Pw*=1) is higher than PD (=1/4), Nation 1 can produce at PD and
sell at Pw.
That is, Nation 1 can exchange X 2X1 (CA) amount of X for Y1Y2 (CT) amount of Y.
(Note that preferences do not change, therefore T is the new consuming point)
35

36. ∆ TCA is the trade triangle in the case of without specialization.
 Now, after trade, Nation 1 reduced consumption of X, but increased
consumption of Y.
Even though Nation 1 consumes less of X and more of Y at point T in relation to point
A, ‘it is better off than it was autarchy because T is on higher indifference curve
U7’.
The movement from point A to point T in consumption measures the gains from
exchange.
→ If subsequently Nation 1 also specialized in production of X and produced at Point
B (at the prevailing relative world price Pw (=1)), then it could exchange X3X4 amount of
X for Y4Y3 amount of Y and ends up in consuming at point E on indifference curve U 10
which represents a higher consumption combination (a higher welfare level).
→ Production and consumption points in the case of specialization:
B: equilibrium production point.
E: equilibrium consumption point.
Nation 1 produces X4 units of X,
consumes X3 units of X, (X3>X1)
exports X3X4 amount of X,
imports Y4Y3 amount of Y in exchange of X3X4.
Total consumption of Y is OY3, which is the sum of OY4 (its own
production) and Y3Y4 (its import).
→ Recall that EFB is the trade triangle in the case of specialization.
The movement from T to E in consumption measures ‘the gains from specialization in
production.’
3.6 Trade Based on Differences in Tastes
Figure 3.6
36

37. Nation 1 and Nation 2 have identical production frontiers (shown by a single curve)
Y
E
U8
U5 PA = 1/4
A
IMA
Y'2 B’
C EXA B PA’= 4
PW = 1
EXA’
IMA’ E’
C’
U’8
Y'1 A’
U’5
X
0 X'2 X'1
 In the analysis before (in Figure 3.4 a and Figure 3.4 b), we supposed that the
‘difference in pretrade relative commodity prices’ was based on the
‘differences in the production frontiers and indifference curves’ in two
nations.
 Whereas, even if two nations have identical production possibility frontiers,
there will still be a basis for mutually beneficial trade if tastes (i.e. demand
preferences) in two nations differ.
 The nation with the relatively smaller demand (or preference for a commodity)
will have a lower relative price for that commodity.
37

38.  The process of specialization in production and trade would then follow, as
described in previous cases (for previous cases see pages 28/ Figure 3.4a and
29/ Figure 3.4b).
 In figure 3.6, the two nations have the same production possibility curve (DD).
→ A is the point where Nation 1 is in equilibrium in autarky.
→ PA represents the autarky price of Nation 1.
→ In this case, Nation 1 has a comparative advantage in commodity X.
On the other hand,
→ A’ is the point where Nation 2 is in equilibrium in autarky.
→ PA’ represents the autarky price of Nation 2.
→ In this case, Nation 2 has a comparative advantage in commodity Y.
 Note that the two nations have different relative domestic (autarky) prices
because of different tastes (demand preferences) even though they have the
same production possibility frontier.
 PW is the world relative commodity price, which is higher than PA (when the
price of X is measured in terms of Y) and higher than PA’ (when the price of
Y is measured in terms of X).
 Now, there is a basis for mutually beneficial trade between the two nations at
world price PW.
 With trade, Nation 1 will move from A to B in production and it will move
from A to E for consumption.
→ Nation 1 will consume more X and more Y than the pretrade case (it
will export EXA’ amount of X commodity, and import IMA’ amount of
Y commodity).
 Also with trade, Nation 2 will move from A’ to B’ in production and it will
move from A’ to E’ for consumption.
38

39. → Nation 2 will consume more Y and more X than the pretrade (it will export
EXA amount of Y commodity, import IMA amount of X commodity).
Consequently, mutually beneficial trade became possible though the same production
frontiers, depending on the difference in tastes.
Chapter Four
OFFER CURVES, DEMAND and SUPPLY (Reciprocal Demands), and
the TERMS OF TRADE
4.1 Introduction
• So far, while analyzing trade between two countries we have assumed a hypothetical
relative equilibrium (world) price which is higher than domestic relative commodity
prices.
• Then, the question is that how this equilibrium-relative commodity price (P W) is
determined.
• We will make use of ‘offer curves’ (sometimes referred to as ‘reciprocal demand
curves’).
• Offer curves (or reciprocal demand curves) were devised and introduced into
international economics by Alfred Marshall and Ysidro Edgeword, two British
economists. Offer curves have been used extensively in international economics,
especially for pedagogical purposes.
• The offer curve of a nation shows how much of its import commodity the nation
demands for it to be willing to supply various amounts of its export commodity.
(In other words, how much of its export commodity Nation 1 offers for 1 unit of
import commodity of Nation 2).
• As the definitions indicate, offer curves incorporate elements of both demand and
supply.
• Alternatively, we can say that the offer curve of a nation shows the nation’s
willingness to import and export at various relative commodity prices.
39

40. 4.2 Illustration of Offer Curves
• Suppose that U.S. and Turkey will trade. U.S. has a comparative advantage in machine
(M), Turkey has a comparative advantage in wheat (W)
→ In Turkey; 1W=1/2M
→ In U.S. ; 1W=2M (or 1/2W=1M)
Figure 4.1
Machine
• Considering Figure 4.1, Turkey
would be neutral if the world price
U.S’s relative was equal to Turkey’s domestic
commodity price
price.
PUS
5 Area for mutually
benefical trade But, if Turkey can exchange 1W
4 for more than 1/2M, it wants to
PT
3 trade.
B Turkey’s relative
2 commodity price (Domestic • Similarly, the U.S. would be neutral
price )
1 if the world price was equal to its
1/2
A domestic price.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Wheat
But if U.S. can Exchange 1M for
more than 1/2W, it wants to trade.
• Then, the area between lines showing domestic relative prices of Turkey and U.S. takes
place for mutually beneficial trade.
• Depending on figure 4.2,
we derive the offer curve
D (10M=5W) of Turkey.
C (10M=10W)
Figure 4.2
4 Machine B (10M=15W)
C
A (10M=20W)
2 B (1/2M=1W)
1 40
1/2
A
0,5 1 1.5 2 3 4 5 Wheat

41. (The offer curve of Turkey bulges toward X axis).
 According to figure 4.2, Turkey is neutral to trade up to point A, because point A is on
its domestic (relative) price.
 But, for example, at point B, which is on the world relative commodity price of B,
Turkey wants to exchange 3W for 2M.
→ That is, Turkey offers (or exports/supplies) 3 units of wheat and demands (or
imports) 2 units of machine in return.
At point C, which is on the world relative-commodity price of C, Turkey wants
to Exchange 4W for 4M
→ That is, for Turkey to import 2 more units of machine it offers less amount of
wheat.
→ As Turkey consumes more and more units of machine, for one additional unit
of machine it offers less amount of wheat (because of diminishing marginal
utility law).
→ If we joint the points A, B, C, D from the origin, we obtain the offer curve of
Turkey.
 Following the same method, the U.S.’s offer curve can be derived (This is left for the
students).
Let us suppose that the offer curve of U.S. is as follows.
Figure 4.3
D (10M=5W)
Machine
C(10M=10W)
4
B(10M=15W)
3 The offer curve of U.S. bulges toward
Y axis.
2
1
41
0 1 2 3 4 Wheat

42.  The world equilibrium relative commodity price is determined at the point where the
offer curves of the two nations intersect.
Figure 4.4
Machine
Turkey Pw
(M) 4 US
E
Keep in mind that prices
1 are relative-commodity
prices
Wheat
0 1 4
(L)
→ At price PW, Turkey
exports 4 units of
wheat (OL)
At price PW, Turkey imports 4 units of machine (EL)
→ At the same price, U.S. exports 4 units of machine (OM=EL)
At the same price, U.S. imports 4 units of wheat (EM=OL)
The hypotenuse
represents the world
OLE is the Turkey’s trade triangle
price OME is the U.S.’s trade triangle
(Equilibrium relative
commodity price)
42

43.  How does the equilibrium relative commodity price change?
→ For various reasons, when the offer curves of the nations shift, the
equilibrium price changes.
→ The variables which cause supply and demand curves to shift cause the offer
curves to shift as well.
(Recall that consumer’s income, the price of related goods, tastes, expectations, technology,
and input prices cause the forces of demand and supply to shift).
Figure 4.5 Illustration of a change in equilibrium world price)
T’
Machine T • Let Turkey demands more
P’
US of U.S. import good.
P
• The offer curve of Turkey
shifts to the right.
• The world price rises from
Wheat OP to OP’ (If the United
States does not change its
demand preference).
• The world price changes; it moves toward the relative price of Turkey.
 How does the welfare effect of this change take place?
→ The welfare effect takes place with the comparison of two opposite
changes:
The first is the change in the terms of trade ( P)
The second is the change in trade volume ( TV)
43

44. Figure 4.6
Machine
T If TV> P , the welfare effect is (+)
P’ If TV< P, the welfare effect is (-)
A
P
OPL is the trade voşume in the first case.
0 L OP’L’ is the trade volume in the second case.
L’
0 L L’ Wheat
4.3 A Special Case: The Importance of Being Unimportant
Let’s take two nations. The first is large (U.S.), and the second is small (Luxembourg).
→ The U.S.’s offer curve bulges more toward Y axis because its demand for the good
(say, butter) of Luxembourg is high.
On the other hand, Luxembourg’s offer curve bulges less toward X axis because its
demand for the good (say, engine) of U.S. is small.
Figure 4.7
Engine L
A
Pus
P U.S.’s gains from
trade
Luxembourg’s
gains from trade
O
Butter
 OPUS = The U.S.’s domestic price
OP = World relative price
44

45. OA = the U.S.’s offer curve
OL = Luxembourg’s offer curve
 The area between OA and OP represents the U.S.’s gains from trade.
 The area between OL and OP represents the Luxembourg’s gains from trade.
 Because the world price is very high from Luxembourg’s domestic price,
Luxembourg gains more from trade than U.S.
 This case is called the importance of being unimportant (Marshall’s
contribution to the theory of trade).
Chapter Four
FACTOR ENDOWMENTS and the HECKSCHER-OHLIN THEORY
5.1 Introduction
• We have seen in previous chapters that the difference in relative commodity prices
between two nations is evidence of their comparative advantage and forms the basis
for mutually beneficial trade.
• We now go one step further and explain the reason, or cause for the difference in
relative commodity prices and comparative advantage between the two nations.
• According to classical economists (Smith, Ricardo, Mill), comparative advantage was
based on the difference in the productivity of labor among nations,
but they provided no explanation for such a difference in productivity.
• The Heckscher-Ohlin theory extends the trade theory and examines the basis for
comparative advantage.
• The H-O theory is based on the following assumptions (see Salvatore, pp.123-124):
45

46. 1. There are two nations, two commodities, and two factors of production (labor and
capital). Considering more than two nations, more than two commodities, and more
than two factors will leave the conclusions of the theory basically unchanged.
2. Both nations use the same technology in production.
3. Commodity X is labor intensive and commodity Y is capital intensive in both nations.
4. Both commodities are produced under constant returns to scale in both nations.
5. There is incomplete specialization in production in both countries.
6. Tastes are equal in both nations.
7. There is perfect competition in both commodities and factor markets in both nations.
8. There is perfect factor mobility within each nation but no international factor
mobility.
9. There are no transportation costs, tariffs, or other obstructions to the free flow of
international trade.
10. All recourses are fully employed in both nations.
11. International trade between the two nations is balanced.
• The main idea of the H-O is that;
“Each nation has comparative advantage in the commodity that it can produce in
accordance with its factor intensity.”
5.2 Illustration of the H-O Theory
• According to the Figure 5.1., the U.S. has a comparative advantage in machine
because machine is a capital intensive good and the U.S. has more capital than labor.
So, capital is the cheap factor with respect to labor in the U.S.
Figure 5.1 a Figure 5.1 b
Machine (Y)
Machine (Y)
Before Trade PW After Trade
A
A’
EXUS
A
E
T IMUS
T U10
U5
IMT
PT
PA
T’
EXT
0 A T Wheat Wheat (X)
(X) (
46

47. • On the other hand, Turkey has a comparative advantage in wheat because wheat is a labor
intensive good and Turkey has more labor than capital.
So, labor is the cheap factor with respect to capital in Turkey.
• In this case, according to the H-O theory, the U.S. will specialize in the machine
production and export machine but import wheat. On the other hand, Turkey will
specialize in wheat production and export wheat but import capital.
• The analysis is very similar as we did for the cases in this chapter. It is left for you!
(Proceed the analysis)
• In sum, according to H-O theory, “a nation will export the commodity whose
production requires the intensive use of the nation’s relatively abundant and
cheap factor and import the commodity whose production requires the intensive
use of the nation’s relatively scarce and expensive factor.”
5.3 Corollaries of the H-O Theory
Depending on the H-O Theory, various theorems have been developed. We will examine
them briefly in the following.
1. The factor-price equalization theorem
→ Paul Samuelson (1976 Nobel Prize in economics) rigorously proved the factor-price
equalization theorem, which is really a corollary since it follows directly from the H-O
theory.
→ For this reason, it is sometimes referred to as the Hecksher-Ohlin-Samouelson theorem
(H-O-S theorem, for short)
→ According to the H-O-S theorem, “International trade will bring about equalization in
the relative and absolute returns to homogenous factors across nations.”
47

48.  What this means is that international trade will cause the wages of
homogenous labor to be same in all trading nations.
 Similarly, international trade will cause the return to homogenous capital
(i.e. capital of the same productivity and risk) to be the same in all trading nations.
 In this respect, it brings about the same results of international factor mobility.
→ How this process works?
→ Turkey has abundant labor; therefore, the price of labor is relatively cheap. With
the opening of trade, as it specializes in wheat production, the demand for labor will
increase.

The price of labor (wage) will tend to rise.
→ The U.S.A. has abundant capital factor. For this reason, the price of capital (i.e., interest
rate) is relatively cheap.

With the opening of trade, as it specializes in machine production, the demand for
capital will increase in the U.S.

The price of capital (interests) will tend to rise.
→ As a result of the movements of factors, the wages in Turkey will tend to be equal to
the wages in the U.S. and the interest rates in the U.S. will tend to be equal to the
rates in Turkey.
→ The best example of this theorem is the real hourly wages in manufacturing in leading
Industrial Countries as a percentage of the U.S. wage (see p. 144 of your textbook,
Salvatore, Table 5.6 in the 9th edition).
→ Depending on H-O-S theorem, it is expected that, with the increasing of factor mobility
and trade in European Union, the wages will rise and the interest rates will fall in the
developing nations who will be integrated with the European Union.
48

49. 2. Stolper- Samuelson Theorem of Income Distribution
This theorem is the corollary of the H-O-S theorem.
→ According to this theorem, free trade will raise the real income of the factor that is
abundant in the nation, and reduce the real income of the factor that is scarce in
the
nation.
→ The protectionist policies of the European Union for the agricultural sector can be
explained by this theorem.
3. The Rybczynski Theorem
This theorem postulates that at constant commodity prices, an increase in the
endowment of one factor will increase by a greater proportion the output of the commodity
which is intensive in that factor and will reduce the output of the other commodity.
Figure 5.2
Machine
Pw=1
Pw=1
M1 A
M2 A’
Wheat
0 W1 W2
→ The nation experienced economic growth with the increase in the endowment of labor.
49

50. → The world relative price remained the same.
→ The output of the commodity (wheat) which is labor-intensive increased by a greater
proportion.
→ The Output of the other good decreased.
5.4 Empirical Tests of the Heckscher-Ohlin Model
→The first empirical test of the H-O model was conducted by Wassily Leontief in 1951
using U.S. data for the year 1947.
→Since the U.S was the most capital-abundant nation in the world, Leontief expected to
find that it exported capital-intensive commodities and imported labor-intensive
commodities.
→According to the results, the United States seemed to export labor intensive commodities
and import capital intensive commodities.
This was the opposite of what the H-O Model predicted and became known as the
“Leontief Paradox”.
→ Hereupon, some explanations were made for this paradox.
→ Many empirical studies were conducted with data from other countries.
→ But, the empirical studies give conflicting results.
∴ In consequent, such an explanation has been made:
The H-O Model is adequate for the explanation of the trade
between the developed and developing nations but not enough to
explain the trade between industrial nations.
∴ New theories have been developed...
5.5 The New Trade Theories
→Heckscher and Ohlin based comparative advantage on the difference in factor
endowments (labor & capital) among nations. This theory, however, leaves a great
50

51. deal of today’s international trade unexplained. Because trade among 200 nations
and trade of thousands of goods are difficult to explain with one model.
→To fill this gap, after 1960s, new international trade theories have been developed.
→In fact, some of these new theories try to explain the source of comparative advantage
and the difference between factor endowments.
The new theories are explained briefly in the following.
1. Skilled Labor Hypothesis:
 The skilled labor-intensive goods are almost the same as capital-intensive
goods. In general, these two kinds of goods are treated together as “man-
made”.
 This revision of H-O Model is called “New-factor Endowment Theory”.
 Empirical studies show that the developed nations having skilled labor export
industrial goods and the developing nations having unskilled labor and
abundant land export primary agricultural goods.
2. Technological Gap Model
 According to this model, a great deal of the trade among industrialized
countries is based on the introduction of new products and new production
processes.
 These give the innovating firm or nation a “temporary” monopoly in the world
market. Protected by laws such as patents and copyrights.
 In time, the new technology becomes widespread. The exporting nation
becomes importing one and vice-versa.
 The industries of textile, electronic equipment, chemistry, steel and iron and
cement are typical examples.
51

52.  The model is tested for various countries. According to the empirical results,
there is a high correlation between the net exports of industries and their
research and development investments.
 For instance, more than 50 percent of R& D personnel in the world work in the
United States. This fact can be interpreted that the United States has
comparative advantages especially in high-tech products.
3. Product Cycle Model
 This model is a generalization and extension of the technological gap model.
 The process is from the innovating to imitating nation:
Step 1: Innovation and to meet the domestic consumption.
Step 2: The product matures. The amount of production becomes greater than
the domestic consumption. The nation exports.
Step 3: * Gradually, the technology and the product become standardized. The
innovative firm starts to give licenses to the firms of other nations.
* The production becomes more advantageous in previously importing
countries with the contribution of other factors.
* The production in the innovating nation starts to decrease.
Step 4: * Anyway, the technology and production methods are fully
standardized and the legal limitations such as patents and copyrights
are removed.
* The innovating nation is eventually in the position of an importing
nation.
* The product cycle is completed.
And the innovating nation, in the meantime, is up to new products.
In the world of today, the time period of product cycles becomes
considerably shorten. This fact implies that the innovating nations such
52

53. as U.S. and Japan have to provide technological improvements to keep
their competitiveness. As a matter fact, they do so!
4) Preference Similarity Hypothesis
 This hypothesis, different from others, views the demand side of the
international trade.
 Therefore, it is also named “overlapping demands” hypothesis.
 According to this model, a nation exports those manufactured products for
which a large domestic market exists.
 These are products that appeal to the majority of the population.
 In the process of satisfying such a market, the nation acquires the necessary
experience and efficiency to be able subsequently to export these commodities
to other nations with similar tastes and income levels.
 On the other hand, the nation will import those products that appeal to its low-
and high-income minorities.
 According to this hypothesis, trade in manufactures is likely to be largest
among countries with similar tastes and income levels.
 While confirmed for Sweden, this hypothesis has not been confirmed for other
nations. It cannot explain the goods that a nation produces only for exports.
For example, why such non-Christian nations as Japan and Korea export
artificial christmas trees and christmas cards in the absence of a domestic
market for these products?
5) Economies of Scale and Monopolistic Competition
 These two theories are related to one another.
The factor endowment theory (H-O Model) makes explanations under
“constant returns to scale”.
53

54. “Constant returns to scale” refers to the production situation where output
grows at the same rate with the increase in inputs or factors of production.
That is, if all inputs are doubled, output is doubled.
 On the other hand, “increasing returns to scale” refers to the situation where
output grows proportionately more than the increase in intputs or factors of
production. That is, if all inputs are doubled, output is more than doubled.
 Increasing returns to scale may occur because at a larger scale of operation a
greater division of labor and specialization becomes possible.
 Therefore, even if two nations are identical in every respect, there is still a
basis for mutually beneficial trade based on economies of scale.
 Because of “external” and “internal” economies, nations specialize in
different goods in the same industry. Thus, trade in the same industry becomes
possible. This is called “intra-industry trade”.
 In addition, the economies of scale stimulate the “differentiated products”
under the situation of monopolistic competition. The consumers are presented
a wide range of differentiated products of the same good.
 The automobile industry is the best example of economies of scale,
differentiated products and intra-industry trade.
 The importance of intra-industry trade became apparent when tariffs and other
obstructions to the flow of trade among members of the European Union were
removed in 1958.
 The study made by B. Balassa (in 1967) showed that “The trade volume
increased very speed among member nations of the E.U., but most of this
trade was different goods within the same industries.
5.6 Synthesis of Trade Theories
54

55. The overall conclusions that we can reach regarding the empirical relevance of the trade
theories examined thus far are:
(1) Most of the trade between developed and developing countries are “inter-
industry trade” based on differences in factor endowments, as postulated by Heckscher-
Ohlin.
(2) An increasing proportion of the trade among industrialized countries is
“intra-industry trade” based on economies of scale in differentiated products, as
postulated by the new trade theories.
5.7 Transportation Costs and International Trade
→ So far we have assumed that costs of transportation are zero. We can relax this
assumption.
→ Costs of transportation affect international trade directly by affecting the price of the
traded commodity in the exporting and importing countries.
→ Furthermore, costs of transportation affect international trade indirectly by affecting
the international location of production and industry.
→ Costs of transportation include
• Freight charges
• Warehouse costs
• Costs of loading and unloading
• Insurance premiums
• Interest charges while goods are in transit
In sum, the term transport or logistics costs include all the costs of transferring
goods from one location (country) to another.
→ Logistic costs are affected by the country’s geography, the quality of its
infrastructures, and the management techniques of the firms.
55