克鲁格曼国贸理论第十版课后习题答案 CH8

国贸易》第八章题及答案《际习《国际贸易》第八章习题及答案第八章跨国公司、对外直接投资与国际贸易一、单项选择题1．由母公司提供全部资本，独立经营，获取全部利润或承担全部损失的子公司，在中国称为（）。

A．股权式合资企业B．外商独资企业C．契约式合资企业D．共同经营企业2．不同国家或地区两个以上的法人、自然人共同投资兴建的，并由投资各方共同经营、共担风险、共负盈亏的企业称为（）。

A．股权式合资企业B．外商独资企业C．契约式合资企业D．共同经营企业3．两个或两个以上的国家或地区的投资者，在某一国家或地区，以合同为基础建立起来的经济组织称为（）。

A．股权式合资企业B．外商独资企业C．契约式合资企业D．共同经营企业4.国际生产折中理论是由英国经济学家（）于 20 世纪 70 年代提出来的。

A.海默 B.金德尔伯格 C.邓宁 D.小岛清5.帝国主义经济的主要特征即是垄断，二战后，（）为主要形式。

A.卡特尔B.辛迪加 C.托拉斯 D.跨国公司6.跨国公司实行（）做法，加强对国外市场的垄断和争夺。

A.高度集中统一B.限制性商业 C.在公司内实行价格转移 D.非价格竞争7.（）是对外直接投资的载体。

A.卡特尔B.辛迪加C.托拉斯D.跨国公司8.对外直投部门结构不断发生变化，二战后，特别 20 世纪 60 年代后，（）最主要。

A.铁路B.建筑业C.矿业 .D.制造业9.（）理论认为，如果在国外生产比国内能使企业获得更大利润，就会导致对外直接投资。

A.所有权优势B.内部化优势C.产品优势D.区位优势10.当所有权优势得到满足时，如果企业将其加以内部化，即在企业内部充分利用这种优势，比向外出让可能更为有利，就具备（）。

A.所有权优势B.内部化优势C.产品优势D.区位优势二、多项选择题1．按国际资本移动的期限长短划分，国际资本移动可分为（）。

A．私人投资 B．短期投资 C．公共投资 D．中长期投资2．以资本来源及用途的标准划分，国际资本移动可分为（）。

Chapter 11Trade Policy in Developing Countries⏹Chapter OrganizationImport-Substituting IndustrializationThe Infant Industry ArgumentPromoting Manufacturing Through ProtectionismCase Study: Mexico Abandons Import-Substituting IndustrializationResults of Favoring Manufacturing: Problems of Import-Substituting IndustrializationTrade Liberalization since 1985Trade and Growth: Takeoff in AsiaBox: India’s BoomSummary⏹Chapter OverviewThe final two chapters on international trade, Chapters 11 and 12, discuss trade policy considerations in the context of specific issues. Chapter 11 focuses on the use of trade policy in developing countries and Chapter 12 focuses on new controversies in trade policy.Although there is great diversity among developing countries, they share some common policy concerns. These include the development of domestic manufacturing industries, the uneven degree of development within the country, and the desire to foster economic growth and improve living standards. This chapter discusses both the successful and unsuccessful trade policy strategies that have been applied by developing countries in attempts to address these concerns.Many developing countries pose the creation of a significant manufacturing sector as a key goal of economic development. One commonly voiced argument for protecting manufacturing industries is the infant industry argument, which states that developing countries have a potential comparative advantage in manufacturing and can realize that potential through an initial period of protection. This argument assumes market failure in the form of imperfect capital markets or the existence of externalities in production. Such a market failure makes the social return to production higher than the private return. Without some government support, the argument goes, the amount of investment that will occur in this industry will be less than socially optimal levels. Government support can theoretically raise investment up to the socially optimal level. Given these arguments, many nations have attempted import-substituting industrialization, where government support is focused on those industries that compete directly with imports. In the 1950s and 1960s, the strategy was quite popular and did lead to a dramatic reduction in imports in some countries. The overall result, though, was not a success. The infant industry argument did not always hold, as protection could let young industries survive but could not make them efficient. The methods used to protect industries© 2015 Pearson Education Limited60 Krugman/Obstfeld/Melitz •International Economics: Theory & Policy, Tenth Editionwere often complex and overlapped across industries, in some cases leading to exorbitantly high rates of protection. Furthermore, protection often led to an inefficiently small scale of production within countries by creating competition over monopoly profits that would not have existed without protection. By the late 1980s, most countries had shifted away from the strategy, and the chapter includes a case study of Mexico’s change from import substitution to a more open strategy.Since 1985, many developing countries have abandoned import substitution and pursued (sometimes aggressively) trade liberalization. The chapter notes two sides of the experience. On the one hand, trade has gone up considerably and changed in character. Developing countries export far more of their GDP than prior to liberalization, and more of it is in manufacturing as opposed to primary commodities. On the other hand, the growth experience of these countries has not been universally good, and it is difficult to tell if the success stories are due to trade or due to reforms that came at the same time as liberalization. While countries such as the “Asian Tigers,” China and India, have experienced spectacular rates of growth following trade liberalization, only part of this growth can be attributed to trade reform. Furthermore, countries such as Brazil and Mexico that have also moved toward freer trade have not experienced the same rates of economic growth.Answers to Textbook Problems1. The countries that seem to benefit most from international trade include many of the countries of thePacific Rim: South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Indonesia, and others. Though the experience of each country is somewhat different, most of these countries employed some kind of infant industry protection during the beginning phases of their development but then withdrew protection relatively quickly after industries became competitive on world markets. Concerningwhether their experiences lend support to the infant industry argument or argue against it is still a matter of controversy. However, it appears that it would have been difficult for these countries to engage in export-led growth without some kind of initial government intervention. Similarly, both China and India have experienced rapid economic growth following economic liberalization and increased openness. Although part of their growth may be attributed to a reduction in trade barriers, other factors certainly played a role. This disparity is underscored by the fact that nations such as Mexico and Brazil also liberalized trade but have yet to see comparable rates of economic growth. 2. The Japanese example gives pause to those who believe that protectionism is always disastrous.However, Japanese success does not demonstrate that protectionist trade policy was responsible for that success. Japan was an exceptional society that had emerged into the ranks of advanced nations before World War II and was recovering from wartime devastation. It is arguable that economicsuccess would have come anyway, so the apparent success of protection represents a “pseudo-infant industry” case of the kind discussed in the text.3. a. The initial high costs of production would justify infant industry protection if the costs to thesociety during the period of protection were less than the future stream of benefits from a mature, low-cost industry.b. An individual firm does not have an incentive to bear development costs itself for an entireindustry when these benefits will accrue to other firms. The first firm will not factor in how itsinvestment benefits other firms, yielding an inefficiently low level of investment relative to thesocial optimum. There is a stronger case for infant industry protection in this instance because of the existence of market failure in the form of the appropriability of technology.© 2015 Pearson Education Limited4. India ceased being a colony of Britain in 1948; thus, its dramatic break from all imports in favor ofhomemade products following WWII was part of a political break from colonialism. In fact, thepreference for homemade clothing production over British-produced textiles was one of the early battles leading up to independence in India. The presence of a domestic manufacturing lobby inMexico (as opposed to recently deposed colonial firms in India) may have helped keep Mexico open to importing capital goods necessary in the manufacturing process.5. In some countries, the infant industry argument simply did not appear to work well. Such protectionwill not create a competitive manufacturing sector if there are basic reasons why a country does not have a competitive advantage in a particular area. This was particularly the case in manufacturing where many low-income countries lack skilled labor, entrepreneurs, and the level of managerialacumen necessary to be competitive in world markets. The argument is that trade policy alone cannot rectify these problems. Often manufacturing was also created on such a small scale that it made the industries noncompetitive where economies of scale are critical to being a low-cost producer.Moreover protectionist policies in less-developed countries have had a negative impact on incentives, which has led to “rent-seeking” or corruption.。

国际经济学克鲁格曼课后习题答案章集团标准化办公室：[VV986T-J682P28-JP266L8-68PNN]第一章练习与答案1．为什么说在决定生产和消费时，相对价格比绝对价格更重要？答案提示：当生产处于生产边界线上，资源则得到了充分利用，这时，要想增加某一产品的生产，必须降低另一产品的生产，也就是说，增加某一产品的生产是有机会机本（或社会成本）的。

生产可能性边界上任何一点都表示生产效率和充分就业得以实现，但究竟选择哪一点，则还要看两个商品的相对价格，即它们在市场上的交换比率。

相对价格等于机会成本时，生产点在生产可能性边界上的位置也就确定了。

所以，在决定生产和消费时，相对价格比绝对价格更重要。

2．仿效图1—6和图1—7，试推导出Y商品的国民供给曲线和国民需求曲线。

答案提示：3．在只有两种商品的情况下，当一个商品达到均衡时，另外一个商品是否也同时达到均衡？试解释原因。

答案提示：4．如果生产可能性边界是一条直线，试确定过剩供给（或需求）曲线。

答案提示：5．如果改用Y商品的过剩供给曲线（B国）和过剩需求曲线（A国）来确定国际均衡价格，那么所得出的结果与图1—13中的结果是否一致？6．答案提示：国际均衡价格将依旧处于贸易前两国相对价格的中间某点。

7．说明贸易条件变化如何影响国际贸易利益在两国间的分配。

答案提示：一国出口产品价格的相对上升意味着此国可以用较少的出口换得较多的进口产品，有利于此国贸易利益的获得，不过，出口价格上升将不利于出口数量的增加，有损于出口国的贸易利益；与此类似，出口商品价格的下降有利于出口商品数量的增加，但是这意味着此国用较多的出口换得较少的进口产品。

对于进口国来讲，贸易条件变化对国际贸易利益的影响是相反的。

8．如果国际贸易发生在一个大国和一个小国之间，那么贸易后，国际相对价格更接近于哪一个国家在封闭下的相对价格水平？答案提示：贸易后，国际相对价格将更接近于大国在封闭下的相对价格水平。

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。

国际贸易理论与实务教材习题答案第一章绪论【试一试】单项选择题（P2）1．通常所说的国际贸易货物额是指（）。

A．世界出口货物总额 B. 世界进口货物总额C．世界进出口货物总额 D. 世界贸易量2．一般情况下，随着一国参与国际分工的程度加深，其对外贸易依存度将会（）。

A．提高 B. 下降C．不变 D. 变化方向不确定3．一国的进出口贸易收支状况用（）来反映。

A．对外贸易额 B. 贸易差额C．对外贸易量 D. 国际贸易量4．转口贸易又称（）A．直接贸易 B. 间接贸易C．过境贸易 D. 中转贸易5．能指明一国出口货物和服务的去向与进口货物和服务的来源，并能反映出一国与其他国家或国家集团之间经济贸易联系程度的指标是（）。

A．对外贸易地理方向 B. 国际贸易地理方向C．对外贸易商品结构 D. 国际贸易商品结构参考答案：1. A、2. A、3. B、4. D、5. A课堂讨论1－1；1994-2002年我国贸易条件系数为何持续下降？（P5）参考答案：（1）国内市场对进口商品的需求增长；（2）外商投资企业的“转移价格”效应；（3）出口企业恶性价格竞争。

课堂讨论1-2：结合以上表格数据，分析我国对外贸易发展存在的结构性问题是什么？（P6）参考答案：（1）从外贸依存度所反映的贸易规模来看，我国已经是贸易大国，但从商品结构看，尚属贸易弱国；（2）重要资源性商品、关键设备和零部件的外贸依存度过高，存在贸易安全隐患；（3）服装、纺织及家电等产业出口依存度过高；（4）对发达国家市场依赖性过高；（5）贸易条件恶化，我国对国外的供给依赖远远大于国外对我国产品的需求依赖，容易陷入比较优势陷阱；（6）外贸规模增大，但对国内经济的贡献在相对下降。

第二章国际贸易理论【试一试】单项选择题（P12）1．绝对成本理论的代表人物是（）。

A．亚当.斯密 B. 大卫.李嘉图C．赫克歇尔 D. 俄林2．在李嘉图的比较成本学说中，国际贸易产生的原因是由于两国的（）。

Chapter 4Specific Factors and Income Distribution⏹Chapter OrganizationThe Specific Factors ModelBox: What Is a Specific Factor?Assumptions of the ModelProduction PossibilitiesPrices, Wages, and Labor AllocationRelative Prices and the Distribution of IncomeInternational Trade in the Specific Factors ModelIncome Distribution and the Gains from TradeThe Political Economy of Trade: A Preliminary ViewIncome Distribution and Trade PoliticsCase Study: Trade and UnemploymentInternational Labor MobilityCase Study: Wage Convergence in the Age of Mass MigrationCase Study: Foreign Workers: The Story of the GCCSummaryAPPENDIX TO CHAPTER 4: Further Details on Specific FactorsMarginal and Total ProductRelative Prices and the Distribution of Income⏹Chapter OverviewIn Chapter 3, the Ricardian model of trade was introduced with labor as the single factor of production exhibiting constant returns to scale. Although informative, this model fails to highlight the observed opposition to free trade. In this chapter, the Specific Factors model is presented to gain a better understanding of the distributional effects of trade. After trade, the exporting industry expands, while the import competing industry shrinks. As a result, the factor specific© 2015 Pearson Education Limitedto the exporting industry gains from trade, while the factor specific to the import competing industry loses from trade. However, the aggregate gains from trade are greater than the losses.The Specific Factors model assumes that there is one factor that is mobile between sectors (commonly thought of as labor) and production factors that are specific to each sector. The chapter begins with a simple economy producing two goods: cloth and food. Cloth is produced using labor and its specific factor, capital. Food is produced using labor and its specific factor, land. Given that capital and labor are specific to their respective industries, the mix of goods produced by a country is determined by share of labor employed in each industry. The key difference between the Ricardian model and the Specific Factors model is that in the latter, there are diminishing returns to labor. For example, production of food will increase as labor is added, but given a fixed amount of land, each additional worker will add less and less to food production.As we assume that labor is perfectly mobile between industries, the wage rate must be identical between industries. With competitive labor markets, the wage must be equal to the price of each good times the marginal product of labor in that sector. We can use the common wage rate to show that the economy will produce a mix of goods such that the relative price of one good in terms of the other is equal to the relative cost of that good in terms of the other. Thus, an increase in the relative price of one good will cause the economy to shift its production toward that good.With international trade, the country will export the good whose relative price is below the world relative price. The world relative price may differ from the domestic price before trade for two reasons. First, as in the Ricardian model, countries differ in their production technologies. Second, countries differ in terms of their endowments of the factors specific to each industry. After trade, the domestic relative price will equal the world relative price. As a result, the relative price in the exporting sector will rise, and the relative price in the import competing sector will fall. This will lead to an expansion in the export sector and a contraction of the import competing sector.Suppose that after trade, the relative price of cloth increases by 10 percent. As a result, the country will increase production of cloth. This will lead to a less than 10 percent increase in the wage rate because some workers will move from the food to the cloth industry. The real wage paid to workers in terms of cloth (w/P C) will fall, while the real wage paid in terms of food (w/P F) will rise. The net welfare effect for labor is ambiguous and depends on relative preferences for cloth and food. Owners of capital will unambiguously gain because they pay their workers a lower real wage, while owners of land will unambiguously lose as they now face higher costs. Thus, trade benefits the factor specific to the exporting sector, hurts the factor specific to the import competing sector, and has ambiguous effects on the mobile factor. Despite these asymmetric effects of trade, the overall effect of trade is a net gain. Stated differently, it is theoretically possible to redistribute the gains from trade to those who were hurt by trade and make everyone better off than they were before trade.Given these positive net welfare effects, why is there such opposition to free trade? To answer© 2015 Pearson Education LimitedChapter 4 Specific Factors and Income Distribution 15this question, the chapter looks at the political economy of protectionism. The basic intuition is that the though the total gains exceed the losses from trade, the losses from trade tend to be concentrated, while the gains are diffused. Import tariffs on sugar in the United States are used to illustrate this dynamic. It is estimated that sugar tariffs cost the average person $7 per year. Added up across all people, this is a very large loss from protectionism, but the individual losses are not large enough to induce people to lobby for an end to these tariffs. However, the gains from protectionism are concentrated among a small number of sugar producers, who are able to effectively coordinate and lobby for continued protection. When the losses from trade are concentrated among politically influential groups, import tariffs are likely to be seen. Ohio, a key swing state in U.S. presidential elections and a major producer of both steel and tires, is used as an example to illustrate this point with both Presidents Bush and Obama supporting tariffs on steel and tires, respectively.Although the losers from trade are often able to successfully lobby for protectionism, the chapter highlights three reasons why this is an inefficient method of limiting the losses from trade. First, the actual impact of trade on unemployment is fairly low, with estimates of only 2.5 percent of unemployment directly attributable to international trade. Second, the losses from trade are driven by one industry expanding at the expense of another. This phenomenon is not specific to international trade and is also seen with changing preferences or new technology. Why should policy be singled out to protect people hurt by trade and not for those hurt by these other trends? Finally, it is more efficient to help those hurt by trade—by redistributing the gains from trade in the form of safety nets for those temporarily unemployed and worker retraining programs to ease the transition from import competing to export sectors—than it is to limit trade to protect existing jobs.Finally, the chapter uses the framework of the Specific Factors model to analyze the distributional effects of international labor migration. With free migration of labor across borders, wages must equalize among countries. Workers will migrate from low-wage countries to high-wage countries. As a result, wages in the low-wage countries will rise, and those in the high-wage countries will fall. Though the net effect of free migration is positive, there will be both winners and losers from migration. Workers who stayed behind in the low-wage country will benefit, as will owners of capital in the high-wage country. Workers in the high-wage country will be hurt, as will owners of capital in the low-wage country. We also need to consider the education levels of migrants relative to the country they move to. Immigrants to the United States, for example, tend to be concentrated in the lowest educational groups. Thus, migration is likely to only have negative effects on the wages of the least educated Americans while raising the wages of those with more education.Answers to Textbook Problems1. A country would opt for international trade even though the workers in the importcompetitive sector face the risk of losing their jobs. This is mainly because if the gains that the consumer realizes if more imports were allowed and the associated increase in employment in the export sectors. Under perfect labor mobility, if the real wage inThailand is higher than Bangladesh, then labor movement from Bangladesh to Thailand takes place. This reduces the labor force and raises the wage rates in Bangladesh.Similarly a movement in labor to Thailand increases the labor force and reduces the real wage rate in Thailand. The movement between two countries will continue until the wages in these two countries are equalized.2. a.b.The curve in the PPF reflects diminishing returns to labor. As production of Q1increases, the opportunity cost of producing an additional unit of Q1 will rise. Basically,as you increase the number of workers producing Q1 with a fixed supply of capital, each additional worker will contribute less to the production of Q1 and represents anincreasingly large loss of potential production of Q2.3. a. Draw the marginal product of labor times the price for each sector given that the totallabor allocated between these sectors must sum to 100. Thus, if there are 10 workers© 2015 Pearson Education LimitedChapter 4 Specific Factors and Income Distribution 17employed in Sector 1, then there are 90 workers employed in Sector 2. If there are 50workers employedin Sector 1, then there are 50 workers employed in Sector 2. For simplicity, define P 1 = 1 andP 2 = 2 (it does not matter what the actual prices are in determining the allocation oflabor, only that the relative price P 2/P 1 =2).In competitive labor markets, the wage is equal to price times the marginal product oflabor. With mobile labor between sectors, the wage rate must be equal betweensectors. Thus, the equilibrium wage is determined by the intersection of the two P ⨯MPL curves. Looking at the diagram above,it appears that this occurs at a wage rate of 10 and a labor supply of 30 workers inSector 1(70 workers in Sector 2).b. From part (a), we know that 30 units of labor are employed in Sector 1 and 70 units oflabor are employed in Sector 2. Looking at the table in Question 2, we see that theselabor allocations will produce 48.6 units of good 1 and 86.7 units of good 2.At this production point (Q 1 = 48.6, Q 2 = 86.7), the slope of the PPF must be equal to-P 1/P 2, which is -½. Looking at the PPF in Question 2a, we see that it is roughly equalto -½.© 2015 Pearson Education Limitedc. If the relative price of good 2 falls to 1.3, we simply need to redraw the P ⨯ MPLdiagram withP 1 = 1 and P 2 =1.3.The decrease in the price of good 2 leads to an increase in the share of labor accruingto Sector 1. Now, the two sectors have equal wages (P ⨯ MPL ) when there are 50workers employed in both sectors.Looking at the table in Question 2, we see that with 50 workers employed in bothSectors 1 and 2, there will be production of Q 1 = 66 and Q 2 = 75.8.The PPF at the production point Q 1 = 66, Q 2 = 75.78 must have a slope of -P 1/P 2 = -1/1.3 = -0.77. d. The decrease in the relative price of good 2 led to an increase in production of good 1and a decrease in the production of good 2. The expansion of Sector 1 increases the income of the factor specific to Sector 1 (capital). The contraction of Sector 2decreases the income of thefactor specific to Sector 2 (land).Chapter 4 Specific Factors and Income Distribution 194. a. The increase in the capital stock in Home will increase the possible production of good 1,but have no effect on the production of good 2 because good 2 does not use capital inproduction. As a result, the PPF shifts out to the right, representing the greaterquantity of good 1 that Home can now produce.b. Given the increased production possibility for Home, the relative supply of home (definedas Q 1/Q 2) is further to the right than the relative supply for Foreign. As a result, therelative price of good 1 is lower in Home than it is in Foreign.c. If both countries open to trade, Home will export good 1, and Foreign will export good 2.d. Owners of capital in Home and owners of land in Foreign will benefit from trade, whileowners of land in Home and owners of capital in Foreign will be hurt. The effects onlabor will be ambiguous because the real wage in terms of good 1 will fall (rise) in Home(Foreign) and the real wage in terms of good 2 will rise (fall) in Home (Foreign). The net welfare effect for labor will depend on preferences in each country. For example, iflabor in Home consumes relatively more of good 2, they will gain from trade. If labor in Home consumes relatively more of good 1, they will lose from trade.5. The real wage in Home is 10, while real wage in Foreign is 18. If there is free movement oflabor, then workers will migrate from Home to Foreign until the real wage is equal in each country. If 4 workers move from Home to Foreign, then there will be 7 workers employed in each country, earning a real wage of 14 in each country.We can find total production by adding up the marginal product of each worker. After trade, total production is 20 + 19 + 18 + 17 + 16 + 15 + 14 = 119 in each country for total world production of 238. Before trade, production in Home was 20 + 19 + 18 = 57. Production in Foreign was 20 + 19 + … + 10 = 165. Total world production before trade was 57 + 165 = 222. Thus, trade increased total output by 16.Workers in Home benefit from migration, while workers in Foreign are hurt. Landowners in Home are hurt by migration (their costs rise), while landowners in Foreign benefit.6. If only 2 workers can move from Home to Foreign, there will be a real wage of 12 in Homeanda real wage of 16 in Foreign.a. Workers in Foreign are hurt as their wage falls from 18 to 16.b. Landowners in Foreign benefit as their costs fall by 2 for each worker employed.c. Workers who stay at home benefit as their wage rises from 10 to 12.d. Landowners in Home are hurt as their costs rise by 2 for each worker employed.e. The workers who do move benefit by seeing their wages rise from 10 to 16.7. If the price of wheat increases by 10%, then the labor demand in the wheat sector wouldincrease by the same 10 percent. In other words, the curve defined by MPLw × Pw would increase by 10 percent. On the other hand, if the price of paddy remains the same and only there is an increase in the price of wheat, this result in an increase in the wage rate less than the increase in the price of wheat. In the present case the wage rate will increase less than 10 percent.© 2015 Pearson Education Limited。

Chapter 6The Standard Trade Model⏹Chapter 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 FrontierWorld Relative Supply and the Terms of TradeInternational Effects of GrowthCase Study: Has the Growth of Newly Industrializing Countries Hurt Advanced Nations?Tariffs 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?International Borrowing and LendingIntertemporal Production Possibilities and TradeThe Real Interest RateIntertemporal Comparative AdvantageSummaryAPPENDIX TO CHAPTER 6: More on Intertemporal Trade⏹Chapter OverviewPrevious chapters have highlighted specific sources of comparative advantage that give rise to international trade. This chapter presents a general model that 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.28 Krugman/Obstfeld/Melitz •International Economics: Theory & Policy, Tenth EditionThe 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 that 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 (ratio of export prices to import prices) 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 China 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 China’s particular growth biases. In teaching these points, it might be interesting and useful to relate them to current events. For example, you can lead a class discussion on 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. exports.The example provided in the text considers the popular arguments in the media that growth in China 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 are discussed. The Relative Supply (RS) and Relative Demand (RD) curves illustrate the effect of biased growth on the terms of trade. The new termsof trade line can be used with the general equilibrium analysis to find the welfare effects of growth. A general principle that emerges is that a country that experiences export-biased growth will have a deterioration in its terms of trade, while a country that experiences import-biased growth has an improvement in its terms of trade. A case study argues that this is really an empirical question, and the evidence suggests that the rapid growth of countries like China has not led to a significant deterioration of the U.S. terms of trade nor has it drastically improved China’s terms of trade.The second area to which the standard trade model is applied is 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, nonzero tariff. Export subsidies, however, only impose costs upon an economy. Internationally, tariffs aid import-competing sectors and hurt export sectors, while subsidies have the opposite effect.The chapter then closes with a discussion of international borrowing and lending. The standard trade model is adapted to trade in consumption across time. The relative price of future consumption is defined as 1/(1 r), where r is the real interest rate. Countries with relatively high real interest rates (newly industrializing countries with high investment returns for example) will be biased toward future consumption and will effectively “export” future consumption by borrowing from established developed countries with relatively lower real interest rates.Chapter 6 The Standard Trade Model 29Answers to Textbook Problems1.If the relative price of palm oil increases in relation to the price of lubricants, this would increase theproduction of palm oil, because Indonesia exports palm oil. Similarly, an increase in relative price of lubricants leads to a shift along the indifference curve, towards lubricants and away from palm oil for Indonesia. This is because Palm oil is relatively expensive, hence reducing palm oil consumption in Indonesia.Expensive palm oil increases the relative income of Indonesia. The income effect would induce more for the consumption of palm oil whereas the substitution effect acts to make the economy consume less of palm oil and more of lubricants. However, if the income effect outweighs the substitution effect, then the consumption of palm oil would increase in Indonesia.2.In panel a, the re duction of Norway’s production possibilities away from fish cause the production of fish relative to automobiles to fall. Thus, despite the higher relative price of fish exports, Norway moves down to a lower indifference curve representing a drop in welfare.In panel b, the increase in the relative price of fish shifts causes Norway’s relative production of fish to rise (despite the reduction in fish productivity). Thus, the increase in the relative price of fish exports allows Norway to move to a higher indifference curve and higher welfare.3. The terms of trade of the home country would worsen. This is because a strong biased productiontowards cloth would increase the home country’s supply of cloth and shifts the supply curve to the right. At the same time, the production of wheat would decline relative to the production of cloth. An increased supply of cloth would reduce the price at the domestic and at the international market. The reduction in international price of cloth would worsen the terms of trade of the home country as the home country exports. On the other hand, if the home country’s production grows in favor of wheat, the terms of trade would improve in favor of the home country. This is because wheat is imported by the home country.30 Krugman/Obstfeld/Melitz •International Economics: Theory & Policy, Tenth Edition4. 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 for 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 worldrelative price.a. An oil supply disruption from the Middle East decreases the supply of raw materials, whichincreases the world relative supply of manufactures to raw materials. The world relative supplycurve shifts out, decreasing the world relative price of manufactured goods and deterioratingJapan’s terms of trade.b. Korea’s increased automobile production increases the supply of manufactures, which in creasesthe world RS. The world relative supply curve shifts out, decreasing the world relative price ofmanufactured goods and deteriorating Japan’s terms of trade.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 because 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 out. 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(p M/p R). This price change will increase Japan’s RS and decrease Japan’s RD, which increases the world RS 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 tr ade 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.Chapter 6 The Standard Trade Model 31 7. These results acknowledge the biased growth that 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 that 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 the terms of trade improvement due to export-biased growth ambiguous. Import-biased growth unambiguously improves welfare for the growing country.a. The relative price of good X falls, causing country A’s terms of trade to worsen. A’s welfare mayincrease or, less likely, decrease, and B’s welfare increases.b. The relative price of good Y rises, causing A’s terms of trade to improve. A’s welfare increases,and B’s welfare decreases.c. The relative price of good X falls, causing country B’s terms of trade to improve. B’s welfareincreases, and A’s welfare decreases (they earn less for the same quantity of exports).d. The relative price of good X rises, causing country B’s terms of trade to worsen. B’s welfare mayi ncrease or, less likely, decrease, and A’s welfare increases.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 its markets to world trade should be good for the United States if the change reducesthe relative price of goods that China sends to the United States and hence increases the relative price of goods that the United States exports. Obviously, any sector in the United States hurt by trade with China would be hurt again by India, but on net, the United States 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 that the United States 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. An import tariff makes the imported goods more expensive in the domestic market as compared tothe world market. In a two commodity system e.g. food and cloth, an imposition of import tariff on cloth makes the cloth more expensive for people in the domestic market. Eventually, the internal price of food is cheaper than the relative price in the external market. This pushes the domesticproducers to produce cloth as the relative price is higher. The home consumers shift theirconsumption from cloth to food. Hence, the relative supply of food will fall and the relative demand will increase. With an increase in the world’s relative price for food the homes terms of trade also increases.Similarly, an export subsidy on food makes the opposite effect on the relative supply and demand than the import tariff on cloth. The effect is that the relative supply of food rises while the relative demand for the world declines. Hence, this reduces the home’s terms of trade as the relative price of food falls in the world market.32 Krugman/Obstfeld/Melitz •International Economics: Theory & Policy, Tenth EditionThe parties emphasize on the reduction of tariff to increase its trade with the partner country under the free trade agreements. When a tariff is reduced by both the partner countries, it increases the trade volume between the two countries. The reduction of tariff and free flow of commodities between the partner countries reduces the market price of the commodity and increases the purchasing power of the consumers in both countries. The agreement on the reduction of tariff is bilateral, meaning both countries agree to reduce the tariff, which ultimately increases the terms of trade for both.11. When a country borrows for the present consumption, it is liable to make the payment in future bysacrificing its future consumption. This means, in future the country has to return the principalborrowing amount with some interest rate. If a country borrows 1 unit at present, it has to return (1+ r) times in future, where r is the real interest rate. Hence, the relative price of future consumption is1/(1+r). This shows there is an inverse relation between the interest rate and the relative price offuture consumption. Higher the real interest rate, lower will be the relative price of futureconsumption and vice-versa.12. Comparative advantage in international borrowing and lending is driven by the relative price of futureconsumption and, more specifically, the real interest rate. As the real interest rate rises, the relative price of future consumption 1/(1 r) falls. Effectively, a country with a high real interest rate is one that has high returns on investment. Such a country will prefer to borrow today and take advantage of the high return on investment and enjoy the fruits of current investment with high returns in the future.a. Countries like Argentina and Canada should have high real interest rates as there are largeinvestment opportunities that have yet to be exploited. These countries will have a low price offuture consumption and will be biased toward exporting future consumption, preferring toborrow today.b. Countries like the United Kingdom in the 19th century or the United States today will haverelatively lower real interest rates as they already have a high level of capital and limited returnson new investments. As a result, the relative price of future consumption is high, and they will be biased toward exporting present consumption, preferring to lend today.c. The discovery of large oil reserves that do not require a significant investment to extract will causereal interest rates in Saudi Arabia to fall (large increase in wealth). This will cause the relativeprice of future consumption to rise, making it more likely that Saudi Arabia will have a PPFbiased toward exporting present consumption. Saudi Arabia will increase their current lending as a result of these oil discoveries.d. Oil discovered in Norway that requires a significant investment to extract will have the oppositeeffect as in answer c. This oil cannot turn into wealth until a significant investment is made, soreal interest rates in Norway will rise with this increased demand for investment funds. Higher real interest rates drive the relative price of future consumption down. As a result, Norway will bemore likely to export future consumption, borrowing today.e. High levels of productivity in South Korea imply that South Korean real interest rates are highgiven the lucrative investment opportunities in the country. As in answer d, higher real interestrates should drive the relative price of future consumption down and bias South Korea’sintertemporal PPF toward exporting future consumption.。

第一章练习与答案1．为什么说在决定生产和消费时，相对价格比绝对价格更重要？答案提示：当生产处于生产边界线上，资源则得到了充分利用，这时，要想增加某一产品的生产，必须降低另一产品的生产，也就是说，增加某一产品的生产是有机会机本（或社会成本）的。

生产可能性边界上任何一点都表示生产效率和充分就业得以实现，但究竟选择哪一点，则还要看两个商品的相对价格，即它们在市场上的交换比率。

相对价格等于机会成本时，生产点在生产可能性边界上的位置也就确定了。

所以，在决定生产和消费时，相对价格比绝对价格更重要。

2．仿效图1—6和图1—7，试推导出Y商品的国民供给曲线和国民需求曲线。

答案提示：3．在只有两种商品的情况下，当一个商品达到均衡时，另外一个商品是否也同时达到均衡？试解释原因。

答案提示：4．如果生产可能性边界是一条直线，试确定过剩供给（或需求）曲线。

答案提示：5．如果改用Y商品的过剩供给曲线（B国）和过剩需求曲线（A 国）来确定国际均衡价格，那么所得出的结果与图1—13中的结果是否一致？答案提示：国际均衡价格将依旧处于贸易前两国相对价格的中间某点。

6．说明贸易条件变化如何影响国际贸易利益在两国间的分配。

答案提示：一国出口产品价格的相对上升意味着此国可以用较少的出口换得较多的进口产品，有利于此国贸易利益的获得，不过，出口价格上升将不利于出口数量的增加，有损于出口国的贸易利益；与此类似，出口商品价格的下降有利于出口商品数量的增加，但是这意味着此国用较多的出口换得较少的进口产品。

对于进口国来讲，贸易条件变化对国际贸易利益的影响是相反的。

7．如果国际贸易发生在一个大国和一个小国之间，那么贸易后，国际相对价格更接近于哪一个国家在封闭下的相对价格水平？答案提示：贸易后，国际相对价格将更接近于大国在封闭下的相对价格水平。

8．根据上一题的答案，你认为哪个国家在国际贸易中福利改善程度更为明显些？答案提示：小国。

9*．为什么说两个部门要素使用比例的不同会导致生产可能性边界曲线向外凸？答案提示：第二章答案1．根据下面两个表中的数据，确定（1）贸易前的相对价格；（2）比较优势型态。