克鲁格曼《国际经济学》第八版课后答案(英文)-Ch02

Chapter 2World Trade: An Overview⏹Chapter OrganizationWho Trades with Whom?Size Matters: the Gravity ModelThe Logic of the Gravity ModelUsing the Gravity Model: Looking for AnomaliesImpediments to Trade: Distance, Barriers, and BordersThe Changing Pattern of World TradeHas the World Gotten SmallerWhat Do We Trade?Service OutsourcingDo Old Rules Still Apply?Summary⏹Key ThemesBefore entering into a series of theoretical models that explain why countries trade across borders and the benefits of this trade (Chapters 3–11), Chapter 2 considers the pattern of world trade which we observe today. The core idea of the chapter is the empirical model known as the gravity model. The gravity model is based on the observations that: (1) countries tend to trade with other nearby economies and (2) countries’ trade is proportional to their size. The model is called the gravity model as it is similar in form to the physics equation that describes the pull of one body on another as proportional to their size and distance.The basic form of the gravity equation is T ij=A⨯Y i⨯Y j/D ij. The logic supporting this equation is that large countries have large incomes to spend on imports and produce a large quantity of goods to sell as exports. This means that the larger either trade partner, the larger the volume of trade between them. At the same time, the distance between two trade partners can substitute for the transport costs that they face as well as proxy for more intangible aspects of a trading relationship such as the ease of contact for firms. This model can be used to estimate the predicted trade between two countries and look for anomalies in trade patterns. The text shows an example where the gravity model can be used to demonstrate the importance of national borders in determining trade flows. According to many estimates, the border between the U.S. and Canada has the impact on trade equivalent to roughly 2000 miles of distance. Other factors, such as tariffs, trade agreements, and common language can all affect trade and can be incorporated into the gravity model.The chapter also considers the way trade has evolved over time. While people often feel that the modern era has seen unprecedented globalization, in fact, there is precedent. From the end of the 19th century to World War I, the economies of different countries were quite connected. Trade as a share of GDP was higher in 1910 than 1960, and only recently have trade levels surpassed the pre World War trade. The nature of trade has change though. The majority of trade is in manufactured goods with agriculture and mineral products (and oil) making up less than 20% of world trade. Even developing countries now export primarily manufactures. In contrast, a century ago, more trade was in primary products as nations tended to trade for things that literally could not be grown or found at home. Today, the reasons for trade are more varied and the products we trade are ever changing (for example, the rise in trade of things like call centers). Th e chapter concludes by focusing on one particular expansion of what is “tradable”—the increase in services trade. Modern information technology has greatly expanded what can be traded as the person staffing a call center, doing your accounting, or reading your X-ray can literally be half-way around the world. While still relatively rare, the potential for a large increase in service outsourcing is an important part of how trade will evolve in the coming decades. The next few chapters will explain the theory of why nations trade.Answers to Textbook Problems1. We saw that not only is GDP important in explaining how much two countries trade, but also,distance is crucial. Given its remoteness, Australia faces relatively high costs of transporting imports and exports, thereby reducing the attractiveness of trade. Since Canada has a border with a largeeconomy (the U.S.) and Australia is not near any other major economy, it makes sense that Canada would be more open and Australia more self-reliant.2. Mexico is quite close to the U.S., but it is far from the European Union (EU). So it makes sense thatit trades largely with the U.S. Brazil is far from both, so its trade is split between the two. Mexico trades more than Brazil in part because it is so close to a major economy (the U.S.) and in partbecause it is a member of a free trade agreement with a large economy (NAFTA). Brazil is farther away from any large economy and is in a free trade agreement with relatively small countries.3. No, if every country’s GDP were to double, world trade would not quadruple. One way to see thisusing the example from Table 2-2 would simply be to quadruple all the trade flows in 2-2 and also double the GDP in 2-1. We would see that the first line of Table 2-2 would be—, 6.4, 1.6, 1.6. If that were true, Country A would have exported $8 trillion which is equal to its entire GDP. Likewise, it would have imported $8 trillion, meaning it had zero spending on its own goods (highly unlikely). If instead we filled in Table 2-2 as before, by multiplying the appropriate shares of the world economy times a country’s GDP, we would see the first line of Table 2-2 reads—, 3.2, 0.8, 0.8. In this case, 60% of Country A’s GDP is exported, the same as before. The logic is that while the world G DP has doubled, increasing the likelihood of international trade, the local economy has doubled, increasing the likelihood of domestic trade. The gravity equation still holds. If you fill in the entire table, you will see that where before the equation was 0.1 ⨯ GDP i⨯ GDP j, it now is 0.05 ⨯ GDP i⨯ GDP j. The coefficient on each GDP is still one, but the overall constant has changed.4. As the share of world GDP which belongs to East Asian economies grows, then in every traderelationship which involves an East Asian economy, the size of the East Asian economy has grown.This makes the trade relationships with East Asian countries larger over time. The logic is similar for why the countries trade more with one another. Previously, they were quite small economies, meaning that their markets were too small to import a substantial amount. As they became morewealthy and the consumption demands of their populace rose, they were each able to importmore. Thus, while they previously had focused their exports to other rich nations, over time, they became part of the rich nation club and thus were targets for one another’s exports. Again, using the gravity model, when South Korea and Taiwan were both small, the product of their GDPs was quite small, meaning despite their proximity, there was little trade between them. Now that they have both grown considerably, their GDPs predict a considerable amount of trade.5. As the chapter discusses, a century ago, much of world trade was in commodities that in many wayswere climate or geography determined. Thus, the UK imported goods that it could not make itself.This meant importing things like cotton or rubber from countries in the Western Hemisphere or Asia.As the UK’s climate and natural resource endowments were fairly similar to those in the rest of Europe, it had less of a need to import from other European countries. In the aftermath of the IndustrialRevolution, where manufacturing trade accelerated and has continued to expand with improvements in transportation and communications, it is not surprising that the UK would turn more to the nearby and large economies in Europe for much of its trade. This is a direct prediction of the gravity model.。

Chapter 5The Standard Trade ModelChapter OrganizationA Standard Model of a Trading EconomyProduction Possibilities and Relative SupplyRelative Prices and DemandThe Welfare Effect of Changes in the Terms of TradeDetermining Relative PricesEconomic Growth: A Shift of the RS CurveGrowth and the Production Possibility FrontierRelative Supply and the Terms of TradeInternational Effects of GrowthCase Study: Has the Growth of Newly Industrializing Countries Hurt Advanced Nations? International Transfers of Income: Shifting the RD CurveThe Transfer ProblemEffects of a Transfer on the Terms of TradePresumptions about the Terms of Trade Effects of TransfersCase Study: The Transfer Problem and the Asian CrisisTariffs and Export Subsidies: Simultaneous Shifts in RS and RDRelative Demand and Supply Effects of a TariffEffects of an Export SubsidyImplications of Terms of Trade Effects: Who Gains and Who Loses?SummaryAppendix: Representing International Equilibrium with Offer CurvesDeriving a Country’s Offer CurveInternational EquilibriumChapter 5 The Standard Trade Model 17Chapter OverviewPrevious chapters have highlighted specific sources of comparative advantage which give rise to international trade. This chapter presents a general model which admits previous models as special cases. This “standard trade model” is the workhorse of international trade theory and can be used to address a wide range of issues. Some of these issues, such as the welfare and distributional effects of economic growth, transfers between nations, and tariffs and subsidies on traded goods are considered in this chapter. The standard trade model is based upon four relationships. First, an economy will produce at the point where the production possibilities curve is tangent to the relative price line (called the isovalue line). Second, indifference curves describe the tastes of an economy, and the consumption point for that economy is found at the tangency of the budget line and the highest indifference curve. These two relationships yield the familiar general equilibrium trade diagram for a small economy (one which takes as given the terms of trade), where the consumption point and production point are the tangencies of the isovalue line with the highest indifference curve and the production possibilities frontier, respectively.You may want to work with this standard diagram to demonstrate a number of basic points. First, an autarkic economy must produce what it consumes, which determines the equilibrium price ratio; and second, opening an economy to trade shifts the price ratio line and unambiguously increases welfare. Third, an improvement in the terms of trade increases welfare in the economy. Fourth, it is straightforward to move from a small country analysis to a two country analysis by introducing a structure of world relative demand and supply curves which determine relative prices.These relationships can be used in conjunction with the Rybczynski and the Stolper-Samuelson Theorems from the previous chapter to address a range of issues. For example, you can consider whether the dramatic economic growth of countries like Japan and Korea has helped or hurt the United States as a whole, and also identify the classes of individuals within the United States who have been hurt by the particular growth biases of these countries. In teaching these points, it might be interesting and useful to relate them to current events. For example, you can lead a class discussion of the implications for the United States of the provision of forms of technical and economic assistance to the emerging economies around the world or the ways in which a world recession can lead to a fall in demand for U.S. export goods.The example provided in the text considers the popular arguments in the media that growth in Japan or Korea hurts the United States. The analysis presented in this chapter demonstrates that the bias of growth is important in determining welfare effects rather than the country in which growth occurs. The existence of biased growth, and the possibility of immiserizing growth is discussed. The Relative Supply (RS) and Relative Demand (RD) curves illustrate the effect of biased growth on the terms of trade. The new terms of trade line can be used with the general equilibrium analysis to find the welfare effects of growth. A general principle which emerges is that a country which experiences export-biased growth will have a deterioration in its terms of trade, while a country which experiences import-biased growth has an improvement in its terms of trade. A case study points out that growth in the rest of the world has made other countries more like the United States. This import-biased growth has worsened the terms of trade for the United States. The second issue addressed in the context of the standard trade model is the effect of international transfers. The salient point here is the direction, if any, in which the relative demand curve shifts in response to the redistribution of income from a transfer. A transfer worsens the donor’s ter ms of trade if it has a higher marginal propensity to consume its export good than the recipient. The presence of non-traded goods tends to reinforce the deterioration of terms of trade for the donor country. The case study attendant to this issue involves the deterioration of many Asian countries’ terms of trade due to the large capital withdrawals at the end of the 1990s.18 Krugman/Obstfeld •International Economics: Theory and Policy, Eighth EditionThe third area to which the standard trade model is applied are the effects of tariffs and export subsidies on welfare and terms of trade. The analysis proceeds by recognizing that tariffs or subsidies shift both the relative supply and relative demand curves. A tariff on imports improves the terms of trade, expressed in external prices, while a subsidy on exports worsens terms of trade. The size of the effect depends upon the size of the country in the world. Tariffs and subsidies also impose distortionary costs upon the economy. Thus, if a country is large enough, there may be an optimum, non-zero tariff. Export subsidies, however, only impose costs upon an economy. Intranationally, tariffs aid import-competing sectors and hurt export sectors while subsidies have the opposite effect. An appendix presents offer curve diagrams and explains this mode of analysis.Answers to Textbook Problems1.Note how welfare in both countries increases as the two countries move from productionpatterns governed by domestic prices (dashed line) to production patterns governed by worldprices (straight line).2.3. An increase in the terms of trade increases welfare when the PPF is right-angled. The production pointis the corner of the PPF. The consumption point is the tangency of the relative price line and the highest indifference curve. An improvement in the terms of trade rotates the relative price line about its intercept with the PPF rectangle (since there is no substitution of immobile factors, the production point stays fixed). The economy can then reach a higher indifference curve. Intuitively, although there is no supply response, the economy receives more for the exports it supplies and pays less for the imports it purchases.Chapter 5 The Standard Trade Model 19 4. The difference from the standard diagram is that the indifference curves are right angles rather thansmooth curves. Here, a terms of trade increase enables an economy to move to a higher indifference curve. The income expansion path for this economy is a ray from the origin. A terms of tradeimprovement moves the consumption point further out along the ray.5. The terms of trade of Japan, a manufactures (M) exporter and a raw materials (R) importer, is the worldrelative price of manufactures in terms of raw materials (p M/p R). The terms of trade change can be determined by the shifts in the world relative supply and demand (manufactures relative to raw materials) curves. Note that in the following answers, world relative supply (RS) and relative demand (RD) are always M relative to R. We consider all countries to be large, such that changes affect the world relative price.a. Oil supply disruption from the Middle East decreases the supply of raw materials, which increasesthe world relative supply. The world relative supply curve shifts out, decreasing the world relative price of manufactured goods and deteriorating Japan’s terms of t rade.b. Korea’s increased automobile production increases the supply of manufactures, which increasesthe world RS. The world relative supply curve shifts out, decreasing the world relative price ofmanufactured goods and deteriorating Japan’s terms of tr ade.c. U.S. development of a substitute for fossil fuel decreases the demand for raw materials. Thisincreases world RD, and the world relative demand curve shifts out, increasing the world relative price of manufactured goods and improving Japan’s terms of trade. This occurs even if no fusion reactors are installed in Japan since world demand for raw materials falls.d. A harvest failure in Russia decreases the supply of raw materials, which increases the world RS.The world relative supply curve shifts o ut. Also, Russia’s demand for manufactures decreases,which reduces world demand so that the world relative demand curve shifts in. These forcesdecrease the world relative price of manufactured goods and deteriorate Japan’s terms of trade.e. A reduction in Japan’s tariff on raw materials will raise its internal relative price of manufactures.This price change will increase Japan’s RS and decrease Japan’s RD, which increases the worldRS and decreases the world RD (i.e., world RS shifts out and world RD shifts in). The worldrelative price of manufactures declines and Japan’s terms of trade deteriorate.6. The declining price of services relative to manufactured goods shifts the isovalue line clockwise sothat relatively fewer services and more manufactured goods are produced in the United States, thus reducing U.S. welfare.20 Krugman/Obstfeld •International Economics: Theory and Policy, Eighth Edition7. These results acknowledge the biased growth which occurs when there is an increase in one factor ofproduction. An increase in the capital stock of either country favors production of Good X, while an increase in the labor supply favors production of Good Y. Also, recognize the Heckscher-Ohlin result that an economy will export that good which uses intensively the factor which that economy has in relative abundance. Country A exports Good X to Country B and imports Good Y from Country B.The possibility of immiserizing growth makes the welfare effects of a terms of trade improvement due to export-biased growth ambiguous. Import-biased growth unambiguously improves welfare for the growing country.a. A’s terms of trade worsen, A’s welfare may increase or, less likely, decrease, and B’s welfareincreases.b. A’s terms of trade improve, A’s welfare increases and B’s welfare decreases.c. B’s terms of trade improve, B’s welfare increases and A’s welfare decreases.d. B’s terms of trade worsen, B’s welfare may increase or, less likely, decrease, and A’s welfareincreases.8. Immiserizing growth occurs when the welfare deteriorating effects of a worsening in an economy’sterms of trade swamp the welfare improving effects of growth. For this to occur, an economy must undergo very biased growth, and the economy must be a large enough actor in the world economy such that its actions spill over to adversely alter the terms of trade to a large degree. This combination of events is unlikely to occur in practice.9. India opening should be good for the U.S. if it reduces the relative price of goods that China sends tothe U.S. and hence increases the relative price of goods that the U.S. exports. Obviously, any sector in the U.S. hurt by trade with China would be hurt again by India, but on net, the U.S. wins. Note that here we are making different assumptions about what India produces and what is tradable than we are in Question #6. Here we are assuming India exports products the U.S. currently imports and China currently exports. China will lose by having the relative price of its export good driven down by the increased production in India.10. Aid which must be spent on exports increases the demand for those export goods and raises their pricerelative to other goods. There will be a terms of trade deterioration for the recipient country. This can be viewed as a polar case of the effect of a transfer on the terms of trade. Here, the marginal propensity to consume the export good by the recipient country is 1. The donor benefits from a terms of trade improvement. As with immiserizing growth, it is theoretically possible that a transfer actuallyworsens the welfare of the recipient.11. When a country subsidizes its exports, the world relative supply and relative demand schedules shiftsuch that the terms of trade for the country worsen. A countervailing import tariff in a second country exacerbates this effect, moving the terms of trade even further against the first country. The firstcountry is worse off both because of the deterioration of the terms of trade and the distortionsintroduced by the new internal relative prices. The second country definitely gains from the firstcountry’s export su bsidy, and may gain further from its own tariff. If the second country retaliated with an export subsidy, then this would offset the initial improvement in the terms of trade; the“retaliatory” export subsidy definitely helps the first country and hurts th e second.。

Chapter 4Resources, Comparative Advantage, and Income DistributionChapter OrganizationA Model of a Two-Factor EconomyPrices and ProductionChoosing the Mix of InputsFactor Prices and Goods PricesResources and OutputEffects of International Trade Between Two-Factor Economies Relative Prices and the Pattern of TradeTrade and the Distribution of IncomeFactor Price EqualizationTrade and Income Distribution in the Short RunCase Study: North-South Trade and Income InequalityThe Political Economy of Trade: A Preliminary ViewThe Gains from Trade, RevisitedOptimal Trade PolicyIncome Distribution and Trade PoliticsBox: Income Distribution and the Beginnings of Trade Theory Empirical Evidence on the Heckscher-Ohlin ModelTesting the Heckscher-Ohlin ModelImplications of the TestsSummaryAppendix: Factor Prices, Goods Prices, and Input Choices Choice of TechniqueGoods Prices and Factor PricesChapter OverviewIn Chapter 3, trade between nations was motivated by differences internationally in the relative productivity of workers when producing a range of products. In Chapter 4, this analysis goes a step further by introducing the Heckscher-Ohlin theory.The Heckscher-Ohlin theory considers the pattern of production and trade which will arise when countries have different endowments of factors of production, such as labor, capital, and land. The basic point is that countries tend to export goods that are intensive in the factors with which they are abundantly supplied. Trade has strong effects on the relative earnings of resources, and tends to lead to equalization across countries of prices of the factors of production. These theoretical results and related empirical findings are presented in this chapter.The chapter begins by developing a general equilibrium model of an economy with two goods which are each produced using two factors according to fixed coefficient production functions. The assumption of fixed coefficient production functions provides an unambiguous ranking of goods in terms of factor intensities. (The appendix develops the model when the production functions have variable coefficients.) Two important results are derived using this model. The first is known as the Rybczynski effect. Increasing the relative supply of one factor, holding relative goods prices constant, leads to a biased expansion of production possibilities favoring the relative supply of the good which uses that factor intensively.The second key result is known as the Stolper-Samuelson effect. Increasing the relative price of a good, holding factor supplies constant, increases the return to the factor used intensively in the production of that good by more than the price increase, while lowering the return to the other factor. This result has important income distribution implications.It can be quite instructive to think of the effects of demographic/labor force changes on the supply of different products. For example, how might the pattern of production during the productive years of the “Baby Boom” generation differ from the pattern of production for post Baby Boom generations? What does this imply for returns to factors and relative price behavior?The central message concerning trade patterns of the Heckscher-Ohlin theory is that countries tend to export goods whose production is intensive in factors with which they are relatively abundantly endowed. This is demonstrated by showing that, using the relative supply and relative demand analysis, the country relatively abundantly endowed with a certain factor will produce that factor more cheaply than the other country. International trade leads to a convergence of goods prices. Thus, the results from the Stolper-Samuelson effect demonstrate that owners of a country’s abundant factors gain from trade, but ownersof a country’s scarce factors lose. The extension of this result is the important Factor Price Equalization Theorem, which states that trade in (and thus price equalization of) goods leads to an equalization in the rewards to factors across countries. The political implications of factor price equalization should be interesting to students.The chapter also introduces some political economy considerations. First, it briefly notes that many of the results regarding trade and income distribution assume full and swift adjustment in the economy. In the short run, though, labor and capital that are currently in a particular industry may have sector-specific skills or knowledge and are being forced to move to another sector, and this involves costs. Thus, even if a shift in relative prices were to improve the lot of labor, for those laborers who must change jobs, there is a short run cost.The core of the political economy discussion focuses on the fact that when opening to trade, some may benefit and some may lose, but the expansion of economic opportunity should allow society to redistribute some of the gains towards those who lose, making sure everyone benefits on net. In practice, though, those who lose are often more concentrated and hence have more incentive to try to affect policy. Thus, trade policy is not always welfare maximizing, but may simply reflect the preferences of the loudest and best organized in society.Empirical results concerning the Heckscher-Ohlin theory, beginning with the Leontief paradox and extending to current research, do not support its predictions concerning resource endowments explaining overall patterns of trade, though some patterns do match the broad outlines of its theory (e.g., theUnited States imports more low-skill products from Bangladesh and more high-skill products from Germany). This observation has motivated many economists to consider motives for trade between nations that are not exclusively based on differences across countries. These concepts will be exploredin later chapters. Despite these shortcomings, important and relevant results concerning income distribution are obtained from the Heckscher-Ohlin theory.Answers to Textbook Problems1. The definition of cattle growing as land intensive depends on the ratio of land to labor used inproduction, not on the ratio of land or labor to output. The ratio of land to labor in cattle exceeds the ratio in wheat in the United States, implying cattle is land intensive in the United States. Cattle is land intensive in other countries as well if the ratio of land to labor in cattle production exceeds the ratio in wheat production in that country. Comparisons between another country and the United States is less relevant for this purpose.2. a. The box diagram has 600 as the length of two sides (representing labor) and 60 as the lengthof the other two sides (representing land). There will be a ray from each of the two cornersrepresenting the origins. To find the slopes of these rays we use the information from the questionconcerning the ratios of the production coefficients. The question states that a LC/a TC= 20 anda LF/a TF= 5.Since a LC/a TC= (L C/Q C)/(T C/Q C) =L C/T C we have L C= 20T C. Using the same reasoning,a LF/a TF= (L F/Q F)/(T F/Q F) =L F/T F and since this ratio equals 5, we have L F= 5T F. We cansolve this algebraically since L=L C+ L F= 600 and T=T C+ T F= 60.The solution is L C= 400, T C= 20, L F= 200 and T F= 40.b. The dimensions of the box change with each increase in available labor, but the slopes of the raysfrom the origins remain the same. The solutions in the different cases are as follows.L= 800: T C= 33.33, L C= 666.67, T F= 26.67, L F= 133.33L= 1000: T C= 46.67, L C= 933.33, T F= 13.33, L F= 66.67L= 1200: T C= 60, L C= 1200, T F= 0, L F= 0. (complete specialization).c. At constant factor prices, some labor would be unused, so factor prices would have to change, orthere would be unemployment.3. This question is similar to an issue discussed in Chapter 3. What matters is not the absolute abundanceof factors, but their relative abundance. Poor countries have an abundance of labor relative to capital when compared to more developed countries.4. In the Ricardian model, labor gains from trade through an increase in its purchasing power. Thisresult does not support labor union demands for limits on imports from less affluent countries. The Heckscher-Ohlin model directly addresses distribution by considering the effects of trade on theowners of factors of production. In the context of this model, unskilled U.S. labor loses fromtrade since this group represents the relatively scarce factors in this country. The results from theHeckscher-Ohlin model support labor union demands for import limits. In the short run, certainunskilled unions may gain or lose from trade depending on in which sector they work, but in theory, in the longer run, the conclusions of the Heckscher-Ohlin model will dominate.5. Specific programmers may face wage cuts due to the competition from India, but this is not inconsistentwith skilled labor wages rising. By making programming more efficient in general, this development may have increased wages for others in the software industry or lowered the prices of the goodsoverall. In the short run, though, it has clearly hurt those with sector specific skills who will facetransition costs. There are many reasons to not block the imports of computer programming services (or outsourcing of these jobs). First, by allowing programming to be done more cheaply, it expands the production possibilities frontier of the U.S., making the entire country better off on average.Necessary redistribution can be done, but we should not stop trade which is making the nation as a whole better off. In addition, no one trade policy action exists in a vacuum, and if the U.S. blocked the programming imports, it could lead to broader trade restrictions in other countries.6. The factor proportions theory states that countries export those goods whose production is intensivein factors with which they are abundantly endowed. One would expect the United States, whichhas a high capital/labor ratio relative to the rest of the world, to export capital-intensive goods if the Heckscher-Ohlin theory holds. Leontief found that the United States exported labor-intensive goods.Bowen, Leamer and Sveikauskas found for the world as a whole the correlation between factorendowment and trade patterns to be tenuous. The data do not support the predictions of the theory that countries’ e xports and imports reflect the relative endowments of factors.7. If the efficiency of the factors of production differs internationally, the lessons of the Heckscher-Ohlin theory would be applied to “effective factors” which adjust for the differences in technology or worker skills or land quality (for example). The adjusted model has been found to be moresuccessful than the unadjusted model at explaining the pattern of trade between countries. Factor-price equalization concepts would apply to the effective factors. A worker with more skills or in a country with better technology could be considered to be equal to two workers in another country. Thus, the single person would be two effective units of labor. Thus, the one high-skilled workercould earn twice what lower-skilled workers do, and the price of one effective unit of labor would still be equalized.。

ch02国际经济学课后答案与习题（萨尔⽡多）*CHAPTER 2Chapter) (CoreCOMPARATIVE ADVANTAGEOUTLINE2.1 Introduction2.2 Mercantilists’ Views on TradeCase Study 2-1 Mercantilism Is Alive and Well in the Twenty-First Century2.3 Trade Based on Absolute Advantage: Adam Smith2.4 Trade Based on Comparative Advantage: David Ricardo2.5 Gains from Trade with Comparative Advantage2.6 Comparative Advantage with MoneyCase Study 2-2 The Petition of the Candlemakers2.7 Comparative Advantage and Opportunity CostsCase Study 2-3 Labor Productivities and Comparative Advantage2.8 Production Possibility Frontier with Constant Costs2.9 Opportunity Costs and Relative Commodity Prices2.10 Basis and Gains from Trade Under Constant CostsAppendix: Comparative Advantage with More than Two Commodities and NationsA2.1 Comparative Advantage with More than Two CommoditiesA2.2 Comparative Advantage with More than Two NationsKey TermstheoryofvalueLabortradeBasisfortheorytrade OpportunitycostGainsfromtrade Production possibility frontierofPatterncostopportunityConstantMercantilismcommodityRelativeprices advantageAbsolutespecializationCompleteLaissez-faireLaw of comparative advantage Small-country case-7-Lecture Guide1. This is a long and crucial core chapter and may require four classes to cover adequately. In thefirst lecture, I would present Sections 1-4 and assign review questions 1-3.2. In the second lecture of Chapter 2, I would concentrate on Sections 5-6 and carefully explain the law of comparative advantage using simple numerical examples, as in the text. Both sections are crucial. Section 5 explains the law of comparative advantage and Section 6 establishes the link between trade theory and international finance. I find that the numerical explanations before the graphical analysis really helps the student to truly understand the law. The simple lawyer-secretary example should also render the law more immediately relevant to the student. I would also assign Problems 4-7.3. In the third lecture, I would cover Sections 7-9 and assign Problems 8-10.4. In the fourth lecture, I would Section 10 and go over problems 4-10. The appendixes could bemade optional for the more enterprising students in the class.Answer to Review Questions and Problems1. The mercantilists believed that the way for a nation to become rich and powerful was toexport more than it imported. The resulting export surplus would then be settled by an inflow of gold and silver and the more gold and silver a nation had, the richer and more powerful it was. Thus, the government had to do all in its power to stimulate the nation’s exports and discourage and restrict imports. However, 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. The mercantilists thus preached economic nationalism, believing that national interests were basically in conflict.Adam Smith, on the other hand, believed that free trade would make all nations better off.All of this is relevant today because many of the arguments made in favor of restrictinginternational trade to protect domestic jobs are very similar to the mercantilists argumentsmade three or four centuries ago. That is why we can say that “mercantilism is alive and well in the twenty-first century”. Thus we have to be prepared to answer and demonstrate thatthese arguments are basically wrong.2. According to Adam Smith, the basis for trade was absolute advantage, or one country being more productive or efficient in the production of some commodities and other countriesbeing more productive in the production of other commodities.The gains from trade arise as each country specialized in the production of the commodities in which it had an absolute advantage and importing those commodities in which the nation had an absolute disadvantage.Adam Smith believed in free trade and laissez-faire, or as little government interference with the economic system as possible. There were to be only a few exceptions to this policy of laissez-faire and free trade. One of these was the protection of industries important for national defense.3. Ricardo’s law of comparative advantage is superior to Smith’s theory of absolute advantage inthat it showed that even if a nation is less efficient than or has an absolute disadvantage in theproduction of all commodities with respect to the other nations, there is still a basis for beneficial trade for all nations.The gains from trade arise from the increased production of all commodities that arises wheneach country specializes in the production of and exports the commodities of its comparativeadvantage and imports the other commodities.A nation that is less efficient than others will be able to export the commodities of its compara-tive advantage by having its wages and other costs sufficiently lower than in other nations so asto make the commodities of its comparative advantage cheaper in terms of the same currencywith respect to the other nations.4. a. In case A, the United States has an absolute and a comparative advantage in wheat and theUnited Kingdom in cloth.In case B, the United States has an absolute advantage (so that the United Kingdom has anabsolute disadvantage) in both commodities.In case C, the United States has an absolute advantage in wheat but has neither an absoluteadvantage nor disadvantage in cloth.In case D, the United States has an absolute advantage over the United Kingdom in bothcommodities.b. In case A, the United States has a comparative advantage in wheat and the United Kingdomin cloth.In case B, the United States has a comparative advantage in wheat and the United Kingdomin cloth.In case C, the United States has a comparative advantage in wheat and the United Kingdomin cloth.In case D, the United States and the United Kingdom have a comparative advantage in neither commodities.5. a. The United States gains 1C.b. The United Kingdom gains 4C.c. 3C < 4W < 8C.d. The United States would gain 3C while the United Kingdom would gain 2C.6. a. The cost in terms of labor content of producing wheat is 1/4 in the United States and 1 in the United Kingdom, while the cost in terms of labor content of producing cloth is 1/3 in theUnited States and 1/2 in the United Kingdom.b. In the United States, Pw=$1.50 and Pc=$2.00.c. In the United Kingdom, Pw=￡1.00 and Pc=￡0.50.7. The United States has a comparative disadvantage in the production of textiles. Restrictingtextile imports would keep U.S. workers from eventually moving into industries in which the United States has a comparative advantage and in which wages are higher.8. Ricardo’s explanation of the law of comparative is unacceptable because it is based on the labor theory of value, which is not an acceptable theory of value.The explanation of the law of comparative advantage can be based on the opportunity costdoctrine, which is an acceptable theory of value.9. The production possibilities frontier reflects the opportunity costs of producing bothcommodities in the nation.The production possibilities frontier under constant costs is a (negatively sloped) straight line. The absolute slope of the production possibilities frontier reflects or gives the price of thecommodity plotted along the horizontal axis in relation to the commodity plotted along thevertical axis.10. a. See Figure 1.b. In the United States Pw/Pc=3/4, while in the United Kingdom, Pw/Pc=2.c. In the United States Pc/Pw=4/3, while in the United Kingdom Pc/Pw=1/2.d. See Figure 2.The autarky points are A and A' in the United States and the United Kingdom, respectively. The points of production with trade are B and B' in the United States and the UnitedKingdom, respectively.The points of consumption are E and E' in the United States and the United Kingdom,respectively. The gains from trade are shown by E > A for the U.S. and E' > A' for the U.K.Fig 1.1aU.K. Fig 1.1bFigure1Fig 1.2aFig 1.2bFigure2Multiple-Choice Questions1. The Mercantilists did not advocated:*a. free tradeb. stimulating the nation's exportsc. restricting the nations' importsd. the accumulation of gold by the nation2. According to Adam Smith, international trade was based on:*a. absolute advantageb. comparative advantagec. both absolute and comparative advantaged. neither absolute nor comparative advantage3. What proportion of international trade is based on absolute advantage?a. allb. most*c. somed. none4. The commodity in which the nation has the smallest absolute disadvantage is the commodityof its:a. absolute disadvantageb. absolute advantagec. comparative disadvantaged. comparative advantage5. If in a two-nation (A and B), two-commodity (X and Y) world, it is established that nationA has a comparative advantage in commodity X, then nationB must have:a. an absolute advantage in commodity Yb. an absolute disadvantage in commodity Yc. a comparative disadvantage in commodity Y*d. a comparative advantage in commodity Y6. If with one hour of labor time nation A can produce either 3X or 3Y while nation B canproduce either 1X or 3Y (and labor is the only input):a. nation A has a comparative disadvantage in commodity Xb. nation B has a comparative disadvantage in commodity Y*c. nation A has a comparative advantage in commodity Xd. nation A has a comparative advantage in neither commodity7. With reference to the statement in Question 6:a. Px/Py=1 in nation Ab. Px/Py=3 in nation Bc. Py/Px=1/3 in nation B*d. all of the above8. With reference to the statement in Question 6, if 3X is exchanged for 3Y:a. nation A gains 2X*b. nation B gains 6Yc. nation A gains 3Yd. nation B gains 3Y9. With reference to the statement of Question 6, the range of mutually beneficial trade between nation A and B is:a. 3Y < 3X < 5Yb. 5Y < 3X < 9Y*c. 3Y < 3X < 9Yd. 1Y < 3X < 3Y10. If domestically 3X=3Y in nation A, while 1X=1Y domestically in nation B:a. there will be no trade between the two nationsb. the relative price of X is the same in both nationsc. the relative price of Y is the same in both nations*d. all of the above11. Ricardo explained the law of comparative advantage on the basis of:*a. the labor theory of valueb. the opportunity cost theoryc. the law of diminishing returnsd. all of the above12. The Ricardian trade model has been empirically*a. verifiedb. rejectedc. not testedd. tested but the results were inconclusive13. The Ricardian model was tested empirically in terms of differences ina. relative labor productivities costs in various industries among nationsb. relative labor costs in various industries among nations*c. relative labor productivities and costs in various industries among nationsd. none of the above14. A difference in relative commodity prices between two nations can be based upon a difference in:a. factor endowmentsb. technologyc. tastes*d. all of the above15. In the trade between a small and a large nation:a. the large nation is likely to receive all of the gains from trade*b. the small nation is likely to receive all of the gains from tradec. the gains from trade are likely to be equally sharedd. we cannot say。

克鲁格曼国际经济学第八版答案【篇一：克鲁格曼国际经济学课后答案英语版】labor productivity and comparative advantage: the ricardian modelanswers to textbook problems1. a. the production possibility curve is a straight line that intercepts the apple axis at 400(1200/3) and the banana axis at 600 (1200/2).b. the opportunity cost of apples in terms of bananas is 3/2. it takes three units of labor to harvest an apple but only two units of labor to harvest a banana. if one foregoes harvesting an apple, this frees up three units of labor. these 3 units of labor could then be used to harvest 1.5 bananas.c. labor mobility ensures a common wage in each sector and competition ensures the price of goods equals their cost of production. thus, the relative price equals the relative costs, which equals the wage times the unit labor requirement for apples divided by the wage times the unit labor requirement for bananas. since wages are equal across sectors, the price ratio equals the ratio of the unit labor requirement, which is 3 apples per 2 bananas.2. a. the production possibility curve is linear, with the intercept on the apple axis equal to160 (800/5) and the intercept on the banana axis equal to 800 (800/1).b. the world relative supply curve is constructed by determining the supply of apples relative to the supply of bananas at each relative price. the lowest relative price at which apples are harvested is 3 apples per 2 bananas. the relative supply curve is flat at this price. the maximum number of apples supplied at the price of 3/2 is 400 supplied by home while, at this price, foreign harvests 800 bananas and no apples, giving a maximum relative supply at this price of 1/2. this relative supply holds for any price between 3/2 and 5. at the price of 5, both countries would harvest apples. the relative supply curve is again flat at 5. thus, the relative supply curve is step shaped, flat at the price 3/2 from the relativesupply of 0 to 1/2, vertical at the relative quantity 1/2 risingfrom 3/2 to 5, and then flat again from 1/2 to infinity.3. a. the relative demand curve includes the points (1/5, 5), (1/2, 2), (1,1), (2,1/2).b. the equilibrium relative price of apples is found at the intersection of the relative demand and relative supply curves. this is the point (1/2, 2), where the relativedemand curve intersects the vertical section of the relative supply curve. thus the equilibrium relative price is 2.c. home produces only apples, foreign produces only bananas, and each country trades some of its product for the product of the other country.d. in the absence of trade, home could gain three bananas by foregoing two apples, and foreign could gain by one apple foregoing five bananas. trade allows each country to trade two bananas for one apple. home could then gain four bananas by foregoing two apples while foreign could gain one apple by foregoing only two bananas. each country is better off with trade.4.the increase in the number of workers at home shifts outthe relative supply schedulesuch that the corner points are at (1, 3/2) and (1, 5) instead of (1/2, 3/2) and (1/2, 5). the intersection of the relative demand and relative supply curves is now in the lower horizontal section, at the point (2/3, 3/2). in this case, foreign still gains from trade but the opportunity cost of bananas in terms of apples for home is the same whether or not there is trade, so home neither gains nor loses from trade.5.this answer is identical to that in 3. the amount of effective labor has not changedsince the doubling of the labor force is accompanied by a halving of the productivity of labor.6.this statement is just an example of the pauper labor argument discussed in the chapter.the point is that relative wage rates do not come out of thin air; they are determined by comparative productivity and the relative demand for goods. the box in the chapter providesdata which shows the strong connection between wages and productivity. koreas low wage presumably reflects the fact that korea is less productive than the united states in mostindustries. as the test example illustrated, a highly productive country that trades with a less productive, low-wage country will raise, not lower, its standard of living.7.the problem with this argument is that it does not use all the information needed fordetermining comparative advantage in production: this calculation involves the four unit labor requirements (for both the industry and service sectors, not just the two for the service sector). it is not enough to compare only services unit labor requirements. if als als*, home labor is more efficient than foreign labor in services. while this demonstrates that the united states has an absolute advantage in services, this is neithera necessary nor a sufficient condition for determining comparative advantage. for this determination, the industry ratios are also required. the competitive advantage of any industry depends on both the relative productivities of the industries and the relative wages across industries.8.while japanese workers may earn the equivalent wages of u.s. workers, the purchasingpower of their income is one-third less. this implies that although w=w* (more or less), pp* (since 3p=p*). since the united states is considerably more productive in services, service prices are relatively low. this benefits and enhances u.s. purchasing power. however, many of these services cannot be transported and hence, are not traded. this implies that the japanese may not benefit from the lower u.s. services costs, and do not face an international price which is lower than their domestic price. likewise, the price of services in united states does not increase with the opening of trade since these services are non-traded. consequently, u.s. purchasing power is higher than that of japan due to its lower prices on non-traded goods.9.gains from trade still exist in the presence of nontraded goods. the gains from tradedecline as the share of nontraded goods increases. in other words, the higher the portion of goods which do not enter international marketplace, the lower the potential gains from trade. if transport costs were high enough so that no goodswere traded then, obviously, there would be no gains from trade.10.the world relative supply curve in this case consists of a step function, with as manysteps (horizontal portions) as there are countries with different unit labor requirement ratios. any countries to the left of the intersection of the relative demand and relative supply curves export the good in which they have a comparative advantage relative to any country to the right of the intersection. if the intersection occurs in a horizontal portion then the country with that price ratio produces both goods.chapter 3specific factors and income distributionanswers to textbook problems1.texas and louisiana are states with large oil-producing sectors. the real wage of oil-producing factors of production in terms of other goods falls when the price of oil falls relative to the price of other goods. this was the source of economic decline in these states in 1986.2.to analyze the economys production possibility frontier, consider how the output mixchanges as labor is shifted between the two sectors.a. the production functions for goods 1 and 2 are standard plots with quantities on the vertical axis, labor on the horizontal axis, and q1= q1(k1,l1) with slope equal to the mpl1, and on another graph, q2= q2(k2,l2) with slope equal to thempl2.figure 3-1b. to graph the production possibilities frontier, combine the production function diagrams with the economys allocation of labor in a four quadrant diagram. the economys ppf is in the upper right hand corner, as is illustrated in the four quadrant diagram above. the ppf is curved due to declining marginal product of labor in each good.3. a. to solve this problem, one can graph the demand curve for labor in sector 1,represented by (w=mpl1=demand for l1) and the demand curve for labor in sector 2, represented by (w=mpl2=demand for l2) . since the total supply of labor is given by the horizontalaxis, the labor allocation between the sectors is approximately l1=27 and l2=73. the wage rate is approximately $0.98.wl127l2figure 3-2 100lb. use the same type of graph as in problem 2b to show that sectoral output is q1=44 and q2=90. (this involves combining the production function diagrams with the economys allocation of labor in a four quadrant diagram. the economys ppf is in the upper right hand corner, as illustrated in the text.)e a graph of labor demands, as in part a, to show that the intersection of the demand curves for labor occurs at a wage rate approximately equal to $0.74. the relative decline in the price of good 2 caused labor to be reallocated: labor is drawn out of production of good 2 and enters production of good 1 (l1=62, l2=38). this also leads【篇二：克鲁格曼《国际经济学》第八版课后答案(英文)-ch18】monetary system, 1870–1973? chapter organizationmacroeconomic policy goals in an open economyinternal balance: full employment and price-level stabilityexternal balance: the optimal level of the current accountinternational macroeconomic policy under the gold standard, 1870–1914origins of the gold standardexternal balance under the gold standardthe price-specie-flow mechanismthe gold standard “rules of the game”: myth and realitybox: hume v. the mercantilistsinternal balance under the gold standardcase study: the political economy of exchange rate regimes: conflict over america’s monetary standard during the 1890sthe interwar years, 1918–1939the fleeting return to goldinternational economic disintegrationcase study: the international gold standard and the great depressionthe bretton woods system and the international monetary fundgoals and structure of the imfconvertibility and the expansion of private capital flowsspeculative capital flows and crisesanalyzing policy options under the bretton woods systemmaintaining internal balancemaintaining external balanceexpenditure-changing and expenditure-switching policiesthe external-balance problem of the united statescase study: the decline and fall of the bretton woods systemworldwide inflation and the transition to floating ratessummarychapter 18 the international monetary system, 1870–1973 95 ? chapter overviewthis is the first of five international monetary policy chapters. these chapters complement the preceding theory chapters in several ways. they provide the historical and institutional background students require to place their theoretical knowledge in a useful context. the chapters also allow students, through study of historical and current events, to sharpen their grasp of the theoretical models and to develop the intuition those models can provide. (application of the theory to events of current interest will hopefully motivate students to return to earlier chapters and master points that may have been missed on the first pass.) chapter 18 chronicles the evolution of the international monetary system from the gold standard of 1870–1914, through the interwar years, andup to and including the post-world war ii bretton woods regime that ended in march 1973. the central focus of the chapter is the manner in which each system addressed, or failed to address, the requirements of internal and external balance for its participants. a country is in internal balance when its resources are fully employed and there is price level stability. external balance implies an optimal time path of the current account subject to its being balanced over the long run. other factors have been important in the definition of external balance at various times, and these are discussed in the text. the basic definition of external balance as an appropriate current-account level, however, seems to capture a goal that most policy-makers share regardless of the particular circumstances. the price-specie-flow mechanism described bydavid hume shows how the gold standard could ensure convergence to external balance. you may want to present the following model of the price-specie-flow mechanism. this model is based upon three equations:1.2.3. the balance sheet of the central bank. at the most simple level, this is just gold holdings equals the money supply: g ? m. the quantity theory. with velocity and output assumed constant and both normalized to 1, this yields the simple equation m ? p.a balance of payments equation where the current account is a function of the real exchange rate andthere are no private capital flows: ca ? f(e ? p*/p)these equations can be combined in a figure like the one below. the 45? line represents the quantity theory, and the vertical line is the price level where the real exchange rate results in a balanced current account. the economy moves along the 45? line back towards the equilibrium point 0 whenever it is out of equilibrium. for example, the loss of four-fifths of a country’s gold would put that country at point a with lower prices and a lower money supply. the resulting real exchange rate depreciation causes a current account surplus which restores money balances as the country proceeds upthe 45? line from ato 0.figure 18.1the automatic adjustment process described by the price-specie-flow mechanism is expedited by following “rules of the game” under which governments contract the domestic source components oftheir monetary bases when gold reserves are falling (corresponding to a current-account deficit) and expand when gold reserves are rising (the surplus case).in practice, there was little incentive for countries with expanding gold reserves to follow the “rules of the game.” this increased the contractionary burden shouldered by countries with persistent current account deficits. the gold standard also subjugated internal balance to the demands of external balance. research suggests price-level stability and highemployment were attained less consistently under the gold standard than in the post-1945 period.the interwar years were marked by severe economic instability. the monetization of war debt and of reparation payments led to episodes of hyperinflation in europe. an ill-fated attempt to return to the pre-war gold parity for the pound led to stagnation in britain. competitive devaluations and protectionism were pursued in a futile effort to stimulate domestic economic growth during the great depression. these beggar-thy-neighbor policies provoked foreign retaliation and led to the disintegration of the world economy. as one of the case studies shows, strict adherence to the gold standard appears to have hurt many countries during the great depression.determined to avoid repeating the mistakes of the interwar years, allied economic policy-makers met at bretton woods in 1944 to forge a new international monetary system for the postwar world. the exchange-rate regime that emerged from this conference had at its center the u.s. dollar. all other currencies had fixed exchange rates against the dollar, which itself had a fixed value in terms of gold. an international monetary fund was set up to oversee the system and facilitate its functioning by lending to countries with temporary balance of payments problems.a formal discussion of internal and external balance introduces the concepts of expenditure-switching and expenditure-changing policies. the bretton woods system, with its emphasis on infrequent adjustment of fixed parities, restricted the use of expenditure-switching policies. increases in u.s. monetary growth to finance fiscal expenditures after the mid-1960s led to a loss of confidence in the dollar and the termination of the dollar’s convertibil ity into gold. the analysis presented in the text demonstrateshow the bretton woods system forced countries to “import” inflation from the united states and shows that the breakdown of the system occurred when countries were no longer willing to accept this burden. ? answers to textbook problems1. a. since it takes considerable investment to develop uranium mines, you would want a larger currentaccount deficit to allow your country to finance some of the investment with foreign savings.b. a permanent increase in the world price of copper would cause a short-term current accountdeficit if the price rise leads you to invest more in copper mining. if there are no investmenteffects, you would not change your external balance target because it would be optimal simply to spend your additional income.c. a temporary increase in the world price of copper would cause a current account surplus. youwould want to smooth out your country’s consumption by saving some of its temporarily higher income.d. a temporary rise in the world price of oil would cause a current account deficit if you were animporter of oil, but a surplus if you were an exporter of oil. chapter 18 the international monetary system, 1870–1973 972. because the marginal propensity to consume out of income is less than 1, a transfer of income from bto a increases savings in a and decreases savings in b. therefore, a has a current account surplus and b has a corresponding deficit. this corresponds to a balance of payments disequilibrium inhume’s world, which must be financed by gold flows from b to a. these gold flows increase a’s money supply and decrease b’s money supply, pushing up prices in a and depressing prices in b.these price changes cease once balance of payments equilibrium has been restored.3. changes in parities reflected both initial misalignments and balance of payments crises. attempts toreturn to the parities of the prewar period after the war ignored the changes in underlying economic fundamentals that the war caused. this made some exchange rates less than fully credible andencouraged balance of payments crises. central bank commitments to the gold parities were also less than credible after the wartime suspension of the gold standard, and as a result of the increasingconcern of governments with internal economic conditions.4. a monetary contraction, under the gold standard, will lead to an increase in the gold holdings of thecontracting country’s central bank if other countries do not pursue a similar policy. all countriescannot succeed in doing this simultaneously since the total stock of gold reserves is fixed in the short run. under a reserve currency system, however, a monetary contraction causes an incipient rise in the domestic interest rate, which attracts foreign capital. the central bank must accommodate the inflow of foreign capital to preserve the exchange rate parity. there is thus an increase in the central bank’s holdings of foreign reserves equal to the fall in its holdings of domestic assets. there is no obstacle to a simultaneous increase in reserves by all central banks because central banks acquire more claims on the reserve currency country while their citizens end up with correspondingly greater liabilities.5. the increase in domestic prices makes home exports less attractive and causes a current accountdeficit. this diminishes the money supply and causes contractionary pressures in the economywhich serve to mitigate and ultimately reverse wage demands and price increases.6. a “demand determined” increase in dollar reserve holdings would not affect the world supply ofmoney as central banks merely attempt to trade their holdings of domestic assets for dollar reserves.a “supply determined” increase in reserve holdings, however, would result from expansionarymonetary policy in the united states (the reserve center). at least at the end of the bretton woods era the increase in world dollar reserves arose in part because of an expansionary monetary policy in the united states rather than a desire by other central banks to increase their holdings of dollar assets. only the “supply determined” increase in dollar reserves is relevant for analyzing therelationship between world holdings of dollar reserves by central banks and inflation.7. an increase in the world interest rate leads to a fall in a central bank’s holdings of foreign reserves asdomestic residents trade in their cash for foreign bonds. this leads to a decline in the home country’s money supply. the central bank of a “small” country cannot offset these effects sinceit cannot alter the world interest rate. an attempt to sterilize the reserve loss through open market purchases would fail unless bonds are imperfect substitutes.8. capital account restrictions insulate the domestic interest rate from the world interest rate. monetarypolicy, as well as fiscal policy, can be used to achieve internal balance. because there are nooffsetting capital flows, monetary policy, as well as fiscal policy, can be used to achieve internalbalance. the costs of capital controls include the inefficiency which is introduced when the domestic interest rate differs from the world rate and the high costs of enforcing the controls.9. yes, it does seem that the external balance problem of a deficit country is more severe. while themacroeconomic imbalance may be equally problematic in the long run regardless of whether it is a deficit or surplus, large external deficits involve the risk that the market will fix the problem quickly by ceasing to fund the external deficit. in this case, there may have to be rapid adjustment that could be disruptive. surplus countries are rarely forced into rapid adjustments, making the problems less risky.10. an inflow attack is different from capital flight, but many parallels exist. in an “outflow” attack,speculators sell the home currency and drain the central bank of its foreign assets. the central bank could always defend if it so chooses (they can raise interest rates to improbably high levels), but if it is unwilling to cripple the economy with tight monetar y policy, it must relent. an “inflow” attack issimilar in that the central bank can always maintain the peg, it is just that the consequences of doing so may be more unpalatable than breaking the peg. if money flows in, the central bank must buy foreign assets to keep the currency from appreciating. if the central bank cannot sterilize all the inflows (eventually they may run out of domestic assets to sell to sterilize the transactions where they are buying foreignassets), it will have to either let the currency appreciate or letthe money supply rise. if it is unwilling to allow and increase in inflation due to a rising money supply, breaking the peg maybe preferable.11. a. we know that china has a very large current account surplus, placing them high above the xxline. they also have moderate inflationary pressures (described as “gathering” in the question, implying they arenot yet very strong). this suggests that china is above the ii line, but not too farabove it. it would be placed in zone 1 (see below).b. china needs to appreciate the exchange rate to move down on the graph towards balance.(shown on the graph with the dashed line down)c. china would need to expand government spending to moveto the right and hit the overall balancepoint. such a policy would help cushion the negativeaggregate demand pressurethat the appreciation might generate.【篇三：克鲁格曼《国际经济学》计算题及答案】0名劳动力，如果生产棉花的话，a国的人均产量是2吨，b国也是2吨；要是生产大米的话，a国的人均产量是10吨，b国则是16吨。

克鲁格曼《国际经济学》（国际金融部分）课后习题答案（英文版）第一章CHAPTER 1INTRODUCTIONChapter OrganizationWhat is International Economics About?The Gains from TradeThe Pattern of TradeProtectionismThe Balance of PaymentsExchange-Rate DeterminationInternational Policy CoordinationThe International Capital MarketInternational Economics: Trade and MoneyCHAPTER OVERVIEWThe intent of this chapter is to provide both an overview of the subject matter of international economics and to provide a guide to the organization of the text. It is relatively easy for an instructor to motivate the study of international trade and finance. The front pages of newspapers, the covers of magazines, and the lead reports of television news broadcasts herald the interdependence of the U.S. economy with the rest of the world. This interdependence may also be recognized by students through their purchases of imports of all sorts of goods, their personal observations of the effects of dislocations due to international competition, and their experience through travel abroad.The study of the theory of international economics generates an understanding of many key events that shape our domesticand international environment. In recent history, these events include the causes and consequences of the large current account deficits of the United States; the dramatic appreciation of the dollar during the first half of the 1980s followed by its rapid depreciation in the second half of the 1980s; the Latin American debt crisis of the 1980s and the Mexico crisis in late 1994; and the increased pressures for industry protection against foreign competition broadly voiced in the late 1980s and more vocally espoused in the first half of the 1990s. Most recently, the financial crisis that began in East Asia in 1997 andspread to many countries around the globe and the Economic and Monetary Union in Europe have highlighted the way in which various national economies are linked and how important it is for us to understand these connections. At the same time, protests at global economic meetings have highlighted opposition to globalization. The text material will enable students to understand the economic context in which such events occur.Chapter 1 of the text presents data demonstrating the growth in trade and increasing importance of international economics. This chapter also highlights and briefly discusses seven themes which arise throughout the book. These themes include: 1) the gains from trade;2) the pattern of trade; 3) protectionism; 4), the balance of payments; 5) exchange rate determination; 6) international policy coordination; and 7) the international capital market. Students will recognize that many of the central policy debates occurring today come under the rubric of one of these themes. Indeed, it is often a fruitful heuristic to use current events to illustrate the force of the key themes and arguments which are presentedthroughout the text.。

克鲁格曼国际经济学课后答案【篇一：克鲁格曼《国际经济学》(国际金融)习题答案要点】lass=txt>第12章国民收入核算和国际收支1、如问题所述，gnp仅仅包括最终产品和服务的价值是为了避免重复计算的问题。

在国民收入账户中，如果进口的中间品价值从gnp中减去，出口的中间品价值加到gnp中，重复计算的问题将不会发生。

例如：美国分别销售钢材给日本的丰田公司和美国的通用汽车公司。

其中出售给通用公司的钢材，作为中间品其价值不被计算到美国的gnp中。

出售给日本丰田公司的钢材，钢材价值通过丰田公司进入日本的gnp，而最终没有进入美国的国民收入账户。

所以这部分由美国生产要素创造的中间品价值应该从日本的gnp中减去，并加入美国的gnp。

2、（1）等式12-2可以写成ca?(sp?i)?(t?g)。

美国更高的进口壁垒对私人储蓄、投资和政府赤字有比较小或没有影响。

（2）既然强制性的关税和配额对这些变量没有影响，所以贸易壁垒不能减少经常账户赤字。

不同情况对经常账户产生不同的影响。

例如，关税保护能提高被保护行业的投资，从而使经常账户恶化。

（当然，使幼稚产业有一个设备现代化机会的关税保护是合理的。

）同时，当对投资中间品实行关税保护时，由于受保护行业成本的提高可能使该行业投资下降，从而改善经常项目。

一般地，永久性和临时性的关税保护有不同的效果。

这个问题的要点是：政策影响经常账户方式需要进行一般均衡、宏观分析。

3、（1）、购买德国股票反映在美国金融项目的借方。

相应地，当美国人通过他的瑞士银行账户用支票支付时，因为他对瑞士请求权减少，故记入美国金融项目的贷方。

这是美国用一个外国资产交易另外一种外国资产的案例。

（2）、同样，购买德国股票反映在美国金融项目的借方。

当德国销售商将美国支票存入德国银行并且银行将这笔资金贷给德国进口商（此时，记入美国经常项目的贷方）或贷给个人或公司购买美国资产（此时，记入美国金融项目的贷方）。

最后，银行采取的各项行为将导致记入美国国际收支表的贷方。

国际经济学英⽂版（第⼋版）章节练习第⼀章International Economics, 8e (Krugman)Chapter 1 Introduction1.1 What Is International Economics About?1) Historians of economic thought often describe ________ written by ________ and published in ________ as the first real exposition of an economic model.A) ”Of the Balance of Trade,” David Hume, 1776B) ”Wealth of Nations,” David Hume, 1758C) ”Wealth of Nations,” Adam Smith, 1758D) ”Wealth of Nations,” Adam Smith, 1776E) ”Of the Balance of Trade,” David Hume, 1758Answer: E2) 2)Ancient theories of international economics from the 18th and 19th Centuries areA) not relevant to current policy analysis.B) are only of moderate relevance in today’s modern international economy.C) are highly relevant in today’s modern international economy.D) are the only theories that actually relevant to modern international economy.E) are not well understood by modern mathematically oriented theorists.Answer: C3) An important insight of international trade theory is that when countries exchange goods and services one with the other itA) is always beneficial to both countries.B) is usually beneficial to both countries.C) is typically beneficial only to the low wage trade partner country.D) is typically harmful to the technologically lagging country.E) tends to create unemployment in both countries.Answer: B4) If there are large disparities in wage levels between countries, thenA) trade is likely to be harmful to both countries.B) trade is likely to be harmful to the country with the high wages.C) trade is likely to be harmful to the country with the low wages.D) trade is likely to be harmful to neither country.E) trade is likely to have no effect on either country.Answer: D5) Who sells what to whomA) has been a major preoccupation of international economics.B) is not a valid concern of international economics.C) is not considered important for government foreign trade policy since such decisions are made in the private competitive market.D) is determined by political rather than economic factors.E) None of the aboveAnswer: A6) The insight that patterns of trade are primarily determined by international differences in labor productivity was first proposed byA) Adam Smith.B) David Hume.C) David Ricardo.D) Eli Heckscher.E) Lerner and Samuelson. Answer: C7) The euro, a common currency for most of the nations of Western Europe, was introducedA) before 1900.B) before 1990.C) before 2000.D) in order to snub the pride of the U.S.E) None of the above.Answer: C8) For the 50 years preceding 1994, international trade policies have been governedA) by the World Trade Organization.B) by the International Monetary Fund.C) by the World.D) by an international treaty known as the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT).E) None of the above.Answer: D9) The international capital market isA) the place where you can rent earth moving equipment anywhere in the world.B) a set of arrangements by which individuals and firms exchange money now for promises to pay in the future.C) the arrangement where banks build up their capital by borrowing from the Central Bank.D) the place where emerging economies accept capital invested by banks.E) None of the above.Answer: B10) Since 1994, trade rules have been enforced byA) the WTO.B) the G10.C) the GATT.D) The U.S. Congress.E) None of the above.Answer:A11) Cost-benefit analysis of international tradeA) is basically useless.B) is empirically intractable.C) focuses attention primarily on conflicts of interest within countries.D) focuses attention on conflicts of interests between countries.E) None of the above.Answer: C12) An improvement in a country’s balance of payments means a decrease in its balance of payments deficit, or an increase in its surplus. In fact we know that a surplus in a balance of paymentsA) is good.B) is usually good.C) is probably good.D) may be considered bad.E) is always bad.Answer: D13) The GATT wasA) an international treaty.B) an international U.N. agency.C) an international IMF agency.D) a U.S. government agency.E) a collection of tariffs.Answer: A14) International economics can be divided into two broad sub-fieldsA) macro and micro.B) developed and less developed.C) monetary and barter.D) international trade and international money.E) static and dynamic.Answer: DInternational Economics, 8e (Krugman)Chapter 2 World Trade: An Overview2.1 Who Trades with Whom?1) What percent of all world production of goods and services is exported to other countries?A) 10%B) 30%C) 50%D) 100%E) None of the above.Answer: B2) The gravity model offers a logical explanation for the fact thatA) trade between Asia and the U.S. has grown faster than NAFTA trade.B) trade in services has grown faster than trade in goods.C) trade in manufactures has grown faster than in agricultural products.D) Intra-European Union trade exceeds International Trade of the European Union.E) None of the above.Answer: D3) According to the gravity model, a characteristic that tends to affect the probability of trade existing betweenany two countries isA) their cultural affinity.B) the average weight/value of their traded goods.C) their colonial-historical ties.D) the distance between them.E) the number of varieties produced on the average by their industries.Answer: D4) Why does the gravity model work?A) Large economies became large because they were engaged in international trade.B) Large economies have relatively large incomes, and hence spend more on government promotion of trade and investment.C) Large economies have relatively larger areas which raises the probability that a productive activity will take place within the borders of that country.D) Large economies tend to have large incomes and tend to spend more on imports.E) None of the above.Answer: D5) The two neighbors of the United States do a lot more trade with the United States than European economiesof equal size.A) This contradicts predictions from gravity models.B) This is consistent with predictions from gravity models.C) This is relevant to any inferences that may be drawn from gravity models.D) This is because these neighboring countries have exceptionally large GDPs.E) None of the above.Answer: B6) Since World War II (the early 1950s), the proportion of most countries' production being used in some other countryA) remained constant.B) increased.C) decreased.D) fluctuated widely with no clear trend.E) both A and D above.Answer: B7) Since World War II, the relative importance of raw materials, including oil, in total world tradeA) remained constant.B) increased.C) decreased.D) fluctuated widely with no clear trendE) both A and D above.Answer: C8) In the current Post-Industrial economy, international trade in services (including banking and financial services)A) dominates world trade.B) does not exist.C) is relatively small.D) is relatively stagnant.E) None of the above.Answer: C9) In the pre-World War I period, the U.S. exported primarilyA) manufactured goods.B) services.C) primary products including agricultural.D) technology intensive products.E) None of the above.Answer: C10) In the pre-World War I period, the United Kingdom exported primarilyA) manufactured goods.B) services.C) primary products including agricultural.D) technology intensive products.E) None of the above.Answer:A11) In the present, most of the exports from China are inA) manufactured goods.B) services.C) primary products including agricultural.D) technology intensive products.E) None of the above.Answer: AInternational Economics, 8e (Krugman)Chapter 3 Labor Productivity and Comparative Advantage: The Ricardian Model1) Trade between two countries can benefit both countries ifA) each country exports that good in which it has a comparative advantage.B) each country enjoys superior terms of trade.C) each country has a more elastic demand for the imported goods.D) each country has a more elastic supply for the exported goods.E) Both C and D.Answer: A2) In order to know whether a country has a comparative advantage in the production of one particular product we need information on at least ________ unit labor requirementsA) oneB) twoC) threeD) fourE) fiveAnswer: D3) A country engaging in trade according to the principles of comparative advantage gains from trade because itA) is producing exports indirectly more efficiently than it could alternatively.B) is producing imports indirectly more efficiently than it could domestically.C) is producing exports using fewer labor units.D) is producing imports indirectly using fewer labor units.E) None of the above.Answer: B4) Given the information in the table above, if it is ascertained that Foreign uses prison-slave labor to produce its exports, then home shouldA) export cloth.B) export widgets.C) export both and import nothing.D) export and import nothing.E) All of the above.Answer: A5) Given the information in the table above, if the Home economy suffered a meltdown, and theUnit Labor Requirements doubled to 30 for cloth and 60 for widgets then home shouldA) export cloth.B) export widgets.C) export both and import nothing.D) export and import nothing.E) All of the above.Answer: A6) The earliest statement of the principle of comparative advantage is associated withA) David Hume.B) David Ricardo.C) Adam Smith.D) Eli Heckscher.E) Bertil Ohlin.Answer: B7) The Gains from Trade associated with the principle of Comparative Advantage depends onA) the trade partners must differ in technology or tastes.B) there can be no more goods traded than the number of trade partners.C) there may be no more trade partners than goods traded.D) All of the above.E) None of the above.Answer: A8) The Ricardian model demonstrates thatA) trade between two countries will benefit both countries.B) trade between two countries may benefit both regardless of which good each exports.two countries may benefit both if each exports the product in which it has a comparative advantage. C)trade betweenD) trade between two countries may benefit one but harm the other.E) None of the above.Answer: C9) Given the information in the table aboveA) neither country has a comparative advantage.B) Home has a comparative advantage in cloth.C) Foreign has a comparative advantage in cloth.D) Home has a comparative advantage in widgets.E) Home has a comparative advantage in both products.Answer: B10) Given the information in the table above, if wages were to double in Home, then Home shouldA) export cloth.B) export widgets.C) export both and import nothing.D) export and import nothing.E) All of the above.Answer: A11) In a two product two country world, international trade can lead to increases inA) consumer welfare only if output of both products is increased.B) output of both products and consumer welfare in both countries.C) total production of both products but not consumer welfare in both countries.D) consumer welfare in both countries but not total production of both products.E) None of the above.Answer: B12) A nation engaging in trade according to the Ricardian model will find its consumption bundleA) inside its production possibilities frontier.B) on its production possibilities frontier.C) outside its production possibilities frontier.D) inside its trade-partner's production possibilities frontier.E) on its trade-partner's production possibilities frontier.Answer: C13) In the Ricardian model, if a country's trade is restricted, this will cause all except which?A) limit specialization and the division of laborB) reduce the volume of trade and the gains from tradeC) cause nations to produce inside their production possibilities curvesD) may result in a country producing some of the product of its comparative disadvantageE) None of the above.Answer: C14) If the world terms of trade for a country are somewhere between the domestic cost ratio of Hand that of F, thenA) country H but not country F will gain from trade.B) country H and country F will both gain from trade.C) neither country H nor F will gain from trade.D) only the country whose government subsidizes its exports will gain.E) None of the above.Answer: B15) According to Ricardo, a country will have a comparative advantage in the product in which itsA) labor productivity is relatively low.B) labor productivity is relatively high.C) labor mobility is relatively low.D) labor mobility is relatively high.E) None of the above.Answer: B16)Assume that labor is the only factor of production and that wages in the United States equal $20 per hour while wages in Japan are $10 per hour. Production costs would be lower in the United States as compared to Japan ifA) U.S. labor productivity equaled 40 units per hour and Japan's 15 units per hour.B) U.S. productivity equaled 30 units per hour whereas Japan's was 20.C) U.S. labor productivity equaled 20 and Japan's 30.D) U.S. labor productivity equaled 15 and Japan's 25 units per hour.E) None of the above.Answer: A17) Let us define the real wage as the purchasing power of one hour of labor. In the Ricardian 2X2 model, if twocountries under autarky engage in trade thenA) the real wage will not be affected since this is a financial variable.B) the real wage will increase only if a country attains full specialization.C) the real wage will increase in one country only if it decreases in the other.D) the real wage will rise in both countries.E) None of the above.Answer: D18) In a two country and two product Ricardian model, a small country is likely to benefit more than the largecountry becauseA) the large country will wield greater political power, and hence will not yield to market signals.B) the small country is less likely to trade at price equal or close to its autarkic (domestic) relative prices.C) the small country is more likely to fully specialize.D) the small country is less likely to fully specialize.E) None of the above.Answer: B19) An examination of the Ricardian model of comparative advantage yields the clear result thattrade is (potentially) beneficial for each of the two trading partners since it allows for anexpanded consumption choice for each. However, for the world as a whole the expansion ofproduction of one product must involve a decrease in the availability of the other, so that it isnot clear that trade is better for the world as a whole as compared to an initial situation ofnon-trade (but efficient production in each country). Are there in fact gains from trade for theworld as a whole? Explain.Answer: If we were to combine the production possibility frontiers of the two countries to create a single world production possibility frontier, then it is true that any change in production points (from autarky tospecialization with trade) would involve a tradeoff of one good for another from the world'sperspective. In other words, the new solution cannot possibly involve the production of more of bothgoods. However, since we know that each country is better off at the new solution, it must be true thatthe original points were not on the trade contract curve between the two countries, and it was in factpossible to make some people better off without making others worse off, so that the new solutiondoes indeed represent a welfare improvement from the world's perspective.20）Given the information in the table above. What is the opportunity cost of Cloth in terms of Widgets in Foreign? Answer: One half a widget.21) Given the information in the table above. If these two countries trade these two goods in the context of the Ricardian model of comparative advantage, then what is the lower limit of the world equilibrium price of widgets? Answer: 1/2 Cloths.22) Given the information in the table above. If these two countries trade these two goods with each other incontext of the Ricardian model of comparative advantage, what is the lower limit for the price of cloth? Answer: One half a widget.23) Given the information in the table above. What is the opportunity cost of cloth in terms of Widgets inForeign?Answer: 2 widgets.24) If a production possibilities frontier is bowed out (concave to the origin), then production occurs underconditions ofA) constant opportunity costs.B) increasing opportunity costs.C) decreasing opportunity costs.D) infinite opportunity costs.E) None of the above.Answer: B25) If the production possibilities frontier of one the trade partners ("Country A") is bowed out (concave to theorigin), then increased specialization in production by that country willA) increase the economic welfare of both countries.B) increase the economic welfare of only Country A.C) decrease the economic welfare of Country A.D) decrease the economic welfare of Country B.E) None of the above.Answer: A26)If one country's wage level is very high relative to the other's (the relative wage exceeding the relative productivity ratios), thenA) it is not possible that producers in each will find export markets profitable.B) it is not possible that consumers in both countries will enhance their respective welfares throughimports.C) it is not possible that both countries will find gains from trade.D) it is possible that both will enjoy the conventional gains from trade.E) None of the above.Answer: D27) In a two-country, two-product world, the statement "Germany enjoys a comparative advantageover France in autos relative to ships" is equivalent toA) France having a comparative advantage over Germany in ships.B) France having a comparative disadvantage compared to Germany in autos and ships.C) Germany having a comparative advantage over France in autos and ships.D) France having no comparative advantage over Germany.E) None of the above.Answer: A28) Suppose the United states production possibility frontier was flatter to the widget axis, whereasGermany's was flatter to the butter axis. We now learn that the German wage doubles, but U.S.wages do not change at all. We now know thatA) the United States has no comparative advantage.B) Germany has a comparative advantage in butter.C) the United States has a comparative advantage in butter.D) Not enough information is given.E) None of the above.Answer: B29) We know that in antiquity, China exported silk because no-one in any other country knew how to producethis product. From this information we learn thatA) China enjoyed a comparative advantage in silk.B) China enjoyed an absolute advantage, but not a comparative advantage in silk.C) no comparative advantage exists because technology was not diffused.D) China should have exported silk even though it had no comparative advantage.E) None of the above.Answer: A30) The evidence cited in the chapter using the examples of the East Asia New IndustrializingCountries suggests that as international productivities converge, so do international wage levels.Why do you suppose this happened for the East Asian NICs? In light of your answer, what doyou think is likely to happen to the relative wages (relative to those in the United States) ofChina in the coming decade? Explain your reasoning.Answer: Following the logic of the Ricardian model of comparative advantage, the East Asian countries played to their respective comparative advantages. This allowed the world demand to provide excessdemands for their relatively abundant labor, which in turn tended to raise these wages. If Chinafollows the same pattern, their wages levels should also be expected over time to converge to those intheir industrialized country markets.Answers to Textbook Problems1. a. The production possibility curve is a straight line that intercepts the apple axis at 400(1200/3)and the banana axis at 600(1200/2).b. The opportunity cost of apples in terms of bananas is 3/2. It takes three units of labor toharvest an apple but only two units of labor to harvest a banana. If one foregoes harvesting an apple,this frees up three units of labor. These 3 units of labor could then be used to harvest 1.5 bananas.c. Labor mobility ensures a common wage in each sector and competition ensures the price ofgoods equals their cost of production. Thus, the relative price equals the relative costs, which equalsthe wage times the unit labor requirement for apples divided by the wage times the unit laborrequirement for bananas. Since wages are equal across sectors, the price ratio equals the ratio of the unit labor requirement, which is 3 apples per 2 bananas. 2. a. The production possibility curve is linear, with the intercept on the apple axis equal to 160(800/5) and the intercept on the banana axis equal to 800(800/1).b. The world relative supply curve is constructed by determining the supply of apples relative to the supply of bananas at each relative price. The lowest relative price at which apples are harvested is 3 apples per 2 bananas. The relative supply curve is flat at this price. The maximum number of apples supplied at the price of 3/2 is 400 supplied by Home while, at this price, Foreign harvests 800 bananas and no apples, giving a maximum relative supply at this price of 1/2. This relative supply holds for any price between 3/2 and 5. At the price of 5, both countries would harvest apples. The relative supply curve is again flat at 5. Thus, the relative supply curve is step shaped, flat at the price 3/2 from the relative supply of 0 to 1/2, vertical at the relative quantity 1/2 rising from 3/2 to 5, and then flat again from 1/2 to infinity.International Economics, 8e (Krugman)Chapter 4 Resources, Comparative Advantage, and Income Distribution1) In the 2-factor, 2 good Heckscher-Ohlin model, an influx of workers from across the border wouldA) move the point of production along the production possibility curve.B) shift the production possibility curve outward, and increase the production of both goods.C) shift the production possibility curve outward and decrease the production of the labor-intensiveproduct.D) shift the production possibility curve outward and decrease the production of the capital-intensiveproduct.E) None of the above.Answer: D2) In the 2-factor, 2 good Heckscher-Ohlin model, the two countries differ inA) tastes.B) military capabilities.C) size.D) relative availabilities of factors of production.E) labor productivities.Answer: D3) The Heckscher-Ohlin model differs from the Ricardian model of Comparative Advantage in that the formerA) has only two countries.B) has only two products.C) has two factors of production.D) has two production possibility frontiers (one for each country).E) None of the above.Answer: C4) "A good cannot be both land- and labor-intensive." Discuss.Answer: In a two good, two factor model, such as the original Heckscher-Ohlin framework, the factorintensities are relative intensities. Hence, the relevant statistic is either workers per acre (or acres perworker); or wage per rental unit (or rental per wage). In order to illustrate the logic of the statementabove, let us assume that the production of a broom requires 4 workers and 1 acre. Also, let us assumethat the production of one bushel of wheat requires 40 workers and 80 acres. In this case the acres perperson required to produce a broom is one quarter, whereas to produce a bushel of wheat requires 2 acres per person. The wheat is therefore (relatively) land intensive, and the broom is (relatively) labor intensive.5) "No country is abundant in everything." Discuss.Answer: The concept of relative (country) factor abundance is (like factor intensities) a relative concept. When we identify a country as being capital intensive, we mean that it has more capital per worker than doesthe other country. If one country has more capital worker than another, it is an arithmeticimpossibility that it also has more workers per unit capital.6) Refer to above figure. Can you guess which group of producers in Country P might lobby against free trade? Answer:In Country P, the owners of the relatively scarce factor of production are the owners of capital. Their relative and realincomes will decrease, and so they may well attempt to lobby for protectionism, which may prevent the country frommoving to a free trade equilibrium.An Economy can produce good 1 using labor and capital and good 2 using labor and land. The total supply of labor is 100 units. Given the supply of capital, the outputs of the two goods depends on labor input as follows:7) Refer to the table above.(a) Graph the production functions for good 1 and good 2(b) Graph the production possibility frontier. Why is it curved?Answer: The production possibility frontier is curved because of the diminishing returns associated with the expansion of output in the short run in each of the two industries.8) In the 2-factor, 2 good Heckscher-Ohlin model, a change from autarky (no trade) to trade will benefit theowners ofA) capital.B) the relatively abundant factor of production.C) the relatively scarce factor of production.D) the relatively inelastic factor of production.E) the factor of production with the largest elasticity of substitution.Answer: B9) According to the Heckscher-Ohlin model, the source of comparative advantage is a country'sA) technology.B) advertising.C) human capital.D) factor endowments.E) Both A and B.Answer: D10) The Hechscher-Ohlin model states that a country will have a comparative advantage in the good or servicewhose production is relatively intensive in the ________ with which the country is relatively abundant.A) tastesB) technologyC) factor of productionD) opportunity costE) scale economyAnswer: C11) According to the Hecksher-Ohlin model,A) everyone automatically gains from trade.B) the scarce factor necessarily gains from trade.C) the gainers could compensate the losers and still retain gains.D) a country gains if its exports have a high value added.E) None of the above.Answer:CAssume that only two countries, A and B, exist.12) Refer to the table above. If good S is capital intensive, then following the Heckscher-Ohlin Theory,A) country A will export good S.B) country B will export good S.C) both countries will export good S.D) trade will not occur between these two countries.E) Insufficient information is given.Answer: B13) In international-trade equilibrium in the Heckscher-Ohlin model,A) the capital rich country will charge less for the capital intensive good than the price paid by the capital poor country for the capital-intensive good.B) the capital rich country will charge the same price for the capital intensive good as that paid for it by the capital poor country.C) the capital rich country will charge more for the capital intensive good than the price paid by the capital poor country for the capital-intensive good.D) the workers in the capital rich country will earn more than those in the poor country.E) the workers in the capital rich country will earn less than those in the poor country.Answer: B14) The Heckscher-Ohlin model predicts all of the following exceptA) which country will export which product.B) which factor of production within each country will gain from trade.C) the volume of trade.D) that wages will tend to become equal in both trading countries.。

Chapter 8The Instruments of Trade PolicyChapter OrganizationBasic Tariff AnalysisSupply, Demand, and Trade in a Single IndustryEffects of a TariffMeasuring the Amount of ProtectionCosts and Benefits of a TariffConsumer and Producer SurplusMeasuring the Costs and BenefitsOther Instruments of Trade PolicyExport Subsidies: TheoryCase Study: Europe’s Common Agricultural PolicyImport Quotas: TheoryCase Study: An Import Quota in Practice: U.S. SugarVoluntary Export RestraintsCase Study: A Voluntary Export Restraint in Practice: Japanese Autos Local Content RequirementsBox: American Buses, Made in HungaryOther Trade Policy InstrumentsThe Effects of Trade Policy: A SummarySummaryAppendix I: Tariff Analysis in General EquilibriumA Tariff in a Small CountryA Tariff in a Large CountryAppendix II: Tariffs and Import Quotas in the Presence of Monopoly The Model with Free TradeThe Model with a TariffThe Model with an Import QuotaComparing a Tariff with a QuotaChapter 8 The Instruments of Trade Policy 33Chapter OverviewThis chapter and the next three focus on international trade policy. Students will have heard various arguments for and against restrictive trade practices in the media. Some of these arguments are sound and some are clearly not grounded in fact. This chapter provides a framework for analyzing the economic effects of trade policies by describing the tools of trade policy and analyzing their effects on consumers and producers in domestic and foreign countries. Case studies discuss actual episodes of restrictive trade practices. An instructor might try to underscore the relevance of these issues by having students scan newspapers and magazines for other timely examples of protectionism at work.The analysis presented here takes a partial equilibrium view, focusing on demand and supply in one market, rather than the general equilibrium approach followed in previous chapters. Import demand and export supply curves are derived from domestic and foreign demand and supply curves. There are a number of trade policy instruments analyzed in this chapter using these tools. Some of the important instruments of trade policy include specific tariffs, defined as taxes levied as a fixed charge for each unit of a good imported; ad valorem tariffs, levied as a fraction of the value of the imported good; export subsidies, which are payments given to a firm or industry that ships a good abroad; import quotas, which are direct restrictions on the quantity of some good that may be imported; voluntary export restraints, which are quotas on trading that are imposed by the exporting country instead of the importing country; and local content requirements, which are regulations that require that some specified fraction of a good is produced domestically.The import supply and export demand analysis demonstrates that the imposition of a tariff drives a wedge between prices in domestic and foreign markets, and increases prices in the country imposing the tariff and lowers the price in the other country by less than the amount of the tariff. This contrasts with most textbook presentations which make the small country assumption that the domestic internal price equals the world price times one plus the tariff rate. The actual protection provided by a tariff willnot equal the tariff rate if imported intermediate goods are used in the production of the protected good. The proper measurement, the effective rate of protection, is described in the text and calculated for a sample problem.The analysis of the costs and benefits of trade restrictions require tools of welfare analysis. The text explains the essential tools of consumer and producer surplus. Consumer surplus on each unit sold is defined as the difference between the actual price and the amount that consumers would have been willing to pay for the product. Geometrically, consumer surplus is equal to the area under the demand curve and above the price of the good. Producer surplus is the difference between the minimum amount for which a producer is willing to sell his product and the price which he actually receives. Geometrically, producer surplus is equal to the area above the supply curve and below the price line. These tools are fundamental to the student’s understanding of the implications of trade polici es and should be developed carefully. The costs of a tariff include distortionary efficiency losses in both consumption and production. A tariff provides gains from terms of trade improvement when and if it lowers the foreign export price. Summing the areas in a diagram of internal demand and supply provides a method for analyzing the net loss or gain from a tariff.Other instruments of trade policy can be analyzed with this method. An export subsidy operates in exactly the reverse fashion of an import tariff. An import quota has similar effects as an import tariff upon prices and quantities, but revenues, in the form of quota rents, accrue to foreign producers of the protected good. Voluntary export restraints are a form of quotas in which import licenses are held by foreign governments. Local content requirements raise the price of imports and domestic goods and do not result in either government revenue or quota rents.34 Krugman/Obstfeld •International Economics: Theory and Policy, Eighth EditionThroughout the chapter the analysis of different trade restrictions are illustrated by drawing upon specific episodes. Europe’s common agricultural policy provides and example of export subsidies in action. The case study corresponding to quotas describes trade restrictions on U.S. sugar imports. Voluntary export restraints are discussed in the context of Japanese auto sales to the United States. The oil import quota in the United States in the 1960’s provides an example of a local content scheme.There are two appendices to this chapter. Appendix I uses a general equilibrium framework to analyze the impact of a tariff, departing from the partial equilibrium approach taken in the chapter. When a small country imposes a tariff, it shifts production away from its exported good and toward the imported good. Consumption shifts toward the domestically produced goods. Both the volume of trade and welfare of the country decline. A large country imposing a tariff can improve its terms of trade by an amount potentially large enough to offset the production and consumption distortions. For a large country, a tariff may be welfare improving.Appendix II discusses tariffs and import quotas in the presence of a domestic monopoly. Free trade eliminates the monopoly power of a domestic producer and the monopolist mimics the actions of a firm in a perfectly competitive market, setting output such that marginal cost equals world price. A tariff raises domestic price. The monopolist, still facing a perfectly elastic demand curve, sets output such that marginal cost equals internal price. A monopolist faces a downward sloping demand curve under a quota.A quota is not equivalent to a tariff in this case. Domestic production is lower and internal price higher when a particular level of imports is obtained through the imposition of a quota rather than a tariff.Answers to Textbook Problems1. The import demand equation, MD, is found by subtracting the home supply equation from the homedemand equation. This results in MD= 80 - 40 ⨯P. Without trade, domestic prices and quantities adjust such that import demand is zero. Thus, the price in the absence of trade is 2.2. a. Foreign’s export supply curve, XS, is XS=-40 + 40⨯P. In the absence of trade, the price is 1.b. When trade occurs, export supply is equal to import demand, XS=MD. Thus, using theequations from Problems 1 and 2a, P= 1.50, and the volume of trade is 20.3. a. The new MD curve is 80 - 40 ⨯ (P+ t) where t is the specific tariff rate, equal to 0.5. (Note: Insolving these problems, you should be careful about whether a specific tariff or ad valorem tariff is imposed. With an ad valorem tariff, the MD equation would be expressed as MD= 80 - 40 ⨯(1 + t)P.) The equation for the export supply curve by the foreign country is unchanged. Solving,we find that the world price is $1.25, and thus the internal price at home is $1.75. The volume of trade has been reduced to 10, and the total demand for wheat at home has fallen to 65 (from thefree trade level of 70). The total demand for wheat in Foreign has gone up from 50 to 55.b. andc. The welfare of the home country is best studied using the combined numerical andgraphical solutions presented below in Figure 8.1.Figure 8.1Chapter 8 The Instruments of Trade Policy 35where the areas in the figure are:a.55(1.75 - 1.50) -0.5(55 - 50)(1.75 - 1.50) = 13.125b. 0.5(55 - 50)(1.75 - 1.50) = 0.625c. (65 - 55)(1.75 - 1.50) = 2.50d. 0.5(70 - 65)(1.75 - 1.50) = 0.625e. (65 - 55)(1.50 - 1.25) = 2.50Consumer surplus change: -(a+ b+ c+ d) =-16.875. Producer surplus change: a= 13.125.Government revenue change: c+ e= 5. Efficiency losses b+ d are exceeded by terms of tradegain e. (Note: In the calculations for the a, b, and d areas, a figure of 0.5 shows up. This isbecause we are measuring the area of a triangle, which is one-half of the area of the rectangledefined by the product of the horizontal and vertical sides.)4. Using the same solution methodology as in Problem 3, when the home country is very small relativeto the foreign country, its effects on the terms of trade are expected to be much less. The smallcountry is much more likely to be hurt by its imposition of a tariff. Indeed, this intuition is shown in this problem. The free trade equilibrium is now at the price $1.09 and the trade volume is now$36.40.With the imposition of a tariff of 0.5 by Home, the new world price is $1.045, the internal home price is $1.545, home demand is 69.10 units, home supply is 50.90, and the volume of trade is 18.20.When Home is relatively small, the effect of a tariff on world price is smaller than when Home is relatively large. When Foreign and Home were closer in size, a tariff of 0.5 by home lowered world price by 25 percent, whereas in this case the same tariff lowers world price by about 5 percent. The internal Home price is now closer to the free trade price plus t than when Home was relatively large.In this case, the government revenues from the tariff equal 9.10, the consumer surplus loss is 33.51, and the producer surplus gain is 21.089. The distortionary losses associated with the tariff (areas b+ d) sum to 4.14 and the terms of trade gain (e) is 0.819. Clearly, in this small country example, the distortionary losses from the tariff swamp the terms of trade gains. The general lesson is the smaller the economy, the larger the losses from a tariff since the terms of trade gains are smaller.5. ERP = (200 ⨯ 1.50 - 200)/100 = 100%6. The effective rate of protection takes into consideration the costs of imported intermediate goods.Here, 55% of the cost can be imported, suggesting with no distortion, home value added would be 45%. A 15% increase in the price of ethanol, though, means home value added could be as high as 60%. Effective rate of protection = (V t-V w)/V w, where V t is the value added in the presence of trade policies, and V w is the value added without trade distortions. In this case, we have (60 - 45)/45 = 33% effective rate of protection.7. We first use the foreign export supply and domestic import demand curves to determine the newworld price. The foreign supply of exports curve, with a foreign subsidy of 50 percent per unit,becomes XS=-40 + 40(1 + 0.5) ⨯P. The equilibrium world price is 1.2 and the internal foreign price is 1.8. The volume of trade is 32. The foreign demand and supply curves are used to determine the costs and benefits of the subsidy. Construct a diagram similar to that in the text and calculate the area of the various polygons. The government must provide (1.8 - 1.2)⨯ 32 = 19.2 units of output to support the subsidy. Foreign producers surplus rises due to the subsidy by the amount of 15.3 units of output. Foreign consumers surplus falls due to the higher price by 7.5 units of the good. Thus, the net loss to Foreign due to the subsidy is 7.5 + 19.2 - 15.3 = 11.4 units of output. Home consumers and producers face an internal price of 1.2 as a result of the subsidy. Home consumers surplus rises by 70 ⨯ 0.3 + 0.5 (6⨯ 0.3) = 21.9, while Home producers surplus falls by 44 ⨯ 0.3 + 0.5(6 ⨯ 0.3) =14.1, for a net gain of 7.8 units of output.36 Krugman/Obstfeld •International Economics: Theory and Policy, Eighth Edition8. a. False, unemployment has more to do with labor market issues and the business cycle than withtariff policy.b. False, the opposite is true because tariffs by large countries can actually reduce world priceswhich helps offset their effects on consumers.c. This kind of policy might reduce automobile production and Mexico, but also would increase theprice of automobiles in the United States, and would result in the same welfare loss associatedwith any quota.9. At a price of $10 per bag of peanuts, Acirema imports 200 bags of peanuts. A quota limiting theimport of peanuts to 50 bags has the following effects:a. The price of peanuts rises to $20 per bag.b. The quota rents are ($20 - $10) ⨯ 50 = $500.c. The consumption distortion loss is 0.5 ⨯ 100 bags ⨯ $10 per bag = $500.d. The production distortion loss is 0.5 ⨯ 50 bags ⨯ $10 per bag = $250.10. The reason is largely that the benefits of these policies accrue to a small group of people and thecosts are spread out over many people. Thus, those that benefit care far more deeply about these policies. These typical political economy problems associated with trade policy are probably even more troublesome in agriculture, where there are long standing cultural reasons for farmers andfarming communities to want to hold onto their way of life, making the interests even moreentrenched than they would normally be.11. It would improve the income distribution within the economy since wages in manufacturing wouldincrease, and real incomes for others in the economy would decrease due to higher prices formanufactured goods. This is true only under the assumption that manufacturing wages are lower than all others in the economy. If they were higher than others in the economy, the tariff policies would worsen the income distribution.。