克鲁格曼《国际经济学》(第8版)课后习题详解(第11章 贸易政策中的争议)【圣才出品】

克鲁格曼《国际经济学》第8版笔记和课后习题详解第19章宏观经济政策和浮动汇率制下的国际协调19.1复习笔记1．支持浮动汇率制的观点（1）货币政策自主性在布雷顿森林体系的固定汇率制度下，除美国以外的其他国家极少有机会运用货币政策来达到内部平衡和外部平衡。

由于要抵消资本流动的影响，货币政策的作用被弱化了。

但是，如果各国中央银行不再为固定汇率而被迫干预货币市场，各国政府就能够运用货币政策来达到内部平衡和外部平衡，并且各国不再会因为外部因素导致本国出现通货膨胀或通货紧缩。

浮动汇率制的提倡者认为，如果中央银行不必再承担稳定其币值的义务，那么它们将恢复对货币的控制。

货币贬值会降低本国产品的相对价格，从而使外国对本国产品的需求增加，进而减少本国的失业。

同样，在经济过热的国家中，中央银行可以通过压缩货币供给来抑制过热的经济活动，而不必担心过多的国际储备流入会破坏其稳定币值的努力。

通过加强对货币政策的控制，各国可以排除那些扭曲国际支付的障碍。

浮动汇率制的提倡者还认为，各国如果使用浮动汇率，就能够选择自己愿意接受的长期通货膨胀率，而不再会被动地引进国外的通货膨胀率。

支持浮动汇率最为有力的理论之一就是认为它能够通过汇率的自动调整来隔绝国外持续性通货膨胀带来的影响。

产生这种隔绝的机制是购买力平价。

（2）对称性浮动汇率制的支持者认为：浮动汇率制可以消除类似布雷顿森林体系所造成的不对称。

由于各国不再将本国货币钉住对美元的汇率，也就不必因此而持有美元作储备。

所以，各国都可以自主决定本国的货币状况。

同样，美国在运用货币政策或财政政策改变美元汇率时，不会再遇到特别的阻碍。

最后，在全球范围内，所有国家的汇率都将由市场而不是由政府决定。

（3）汇率自动稳定器功能与固定汇率相比，浮动汇率相对减少了需求冲击对就业的影响，从而有利于经济稳定。

当对本国产品和劳务的需求下降时，浮动汇率下的货币贬值，会使本国产品和劳务的价格下降，部分地减轻了这种需求下降的不利影响。

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.。

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。

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.。

克鲁格曼《国际经济学》（第8版）课后习题详解（第11章贸易政策中的争议）【圣才出品】第11章贸易政策中的争议一、概念题1．以邻为壑的政策（beggar-thy-neighbor policies）答：以邻为壑的政策是指以牺牲别国的利益来提高本国福利的政策，即当一个国家采取某种政策或行动的时候，事实上其得到的好处来自于另一个国家的损失，一个国家所得到的，最终会是另一个国家所失去的。

从货币角度来说，本国货币扩张会引起汇率贬值，净出口增加，从而增加产出与就业，但是本国增加净出口对应着国外贸易余额的恶化。

本国货币贬值使需求从国外商品转移到本国商品上，国外的产出与就业会因此下降。

正是由于这个原因，由贬值引起的贸易余额的变动就是以邻为壑的政策，它是输出失业，或以损害其他国家来创造本国就业的一种方式。

本国福利的提高是以牺牲别国利益为代价的，因此这一政策很容易引起别国的报复和贸易战的爆发，最终损害各方的利益。

从国际贸易角度来说，战略性贸易政策就是一种以邻为壑的政策。

战略性贸易政策通过鼓励国内特定产品的出口和限制国外特定产品的进口，来保持本国在世界市场上的竞争优势，虽然使本国受益，但使外国受到了损失，本国也面临着受到外国报复的问题。

反之，如果外国的净出口增加，相当于本国消费者购买了很多外国的商品。

这样，对本国该产业的产品需求的下降就是对本国的该产业的一个冲击。

这种冲击会阻碍对其进行的投资和经营，从而使得这个产业的状况变坏，进而影响本国经济。

总之，以邻为壑的政策将引发贸易战从而使得各方均受到损害。

2．外部性（externalities）答：外部性是指当某个企业的经济行为（或者某个人的消费行为），经过非价格手段，直接地、不可避免地影响了其他企业的生产（或者其他人的效用），并且成为后者自己所不能加以控制的情况时，对前者来说就存在着外部性问题。

外部性可以分为正外部性和负外部性。

正外部性是指某个经济行为主体的行为使他人或者整个社会受益，而受益者无须花费代价；负外部性是指某经济行为主体的行为引起他人成本的增加或者效用的减少。

第3篇汇率与开放经济的宏观经济学第12章国民收入核算与国际收支平衡12.1复习笔记1．国民收入账户（1）GNP宏观经济分析的主要着眼点是一国的国民生产总值（GNP），它是一国的生产要素在一定时期内所生产并在市场上卖出的最终商品和服务的价值总量。

GNP是宏观经济学家研究一国产出时所用的基本度量手段，由花费在最终产品上的支出的市场价值量加总而得到。

GNP的支出与劳动、资本以及其他生产要素紧密相连。

根据购买最终产品的四种可能用途，GNP可以分解为以下四个部分：消费（国内居民私人消费的数额）、投资（私人企业为进行再生产而留下的用于购买厂房设备的数额）、政府购买（政府使用的数额）和经常项目余额（对外净出口的商品和服务的数额）。

（2）国民收入国民收入等于GNP减去折旧，加上净单边转移支付，再减去间接商业税。

即：国民收入＝GNP－折旧＋净单边转移支付－间接商业税在实际经济中，要使GNP和国民收入的恒等关系完全成立，必须对GNP的定义作一定调整：①GNP不考虑机器和建筑物在使用过程中由于磨损而引起的经济损失。

这部分经济损失称为折旧，折旧减少了资本所有者的收入。

为了计算一定时期的国民收入，必须从GNP 中减去这一时期资本的折旧。

GNP减去折旧后称为国民生产净值（NNP）。

②一国的收入可能会包括外国居民的赠与，这种赠与称为单边转移支付。

单边转移支付的例子包括向居住在国外的退休公民支付养老金、赔偿支付和对遭受旱灾国家的救济援助等。

净单边转移支付是一国收入的一部分，但不是一国产出的一部分，因此，净单边转移支付，必须加到NNP中以计算国民收入。

③国民收入取决于生产者获得的产品价格，GNP则取决于购买者所支付的价格。

但是，这两组价格并不是完全一致的，例如，销售税会使得购买者的支付大于销售者的收入，导致GNP被高估，超过了国民收入。

这部分税收被称为间接商业税。

在计算国民收入时，这部分间接商业税必须从GNP中减去。

（3）GDP大多数国家采用国内生产总值（GDP）作为国民经济活动的主要指标，来度量一国境内的生产量。

克鲁格曼《国际经济学》第8版笔记和课后习题详解第6章规模经济、不完全竞争和国际贸易6.1复习笔记1．规模经济（1）规模经济和国际贸易①规模经济的表现规模经济表现为生产规模越大，生产效率越高，产出的增长大于投入的增长。

表6-1列出了某一行业的投入产出关系，且该产品的生产只需要劳动这一种投入。

从表中可以看出，生产10件产品需要15小时的劳动，而生产25件产品只需要30个小时的劳动。

规模经济表现为：劳动投入增加1倍（从15小时增加到30小时），产出却增加了1.5倍（从10件增加到25件）。

表6-1某一假定行业的投入产出关系②规模经济是国际贸易的动因之一假定世界上只有A和B两个国家，二者都具有生产这种产品的同样技术，最初都生产10个单位。

根据表6-1，该产量在每个国家均要15小时的劳动投入，即全世界用30个小时来生产20单位产品。

但是，现在假定该新产品的生产集中到一个国家，比如说A国，且A国在这一行业也投入30个小时的劳动。

然而，在一个国家内投入30个小时的劳动，却能生产出25件产品。

显然，生产集中到A国可以使得世界以同样的劳动投入多产出25%的产品。

可见，各国可以用比以往更有效的规模专业化地生产有限类别的产品；同时，它们之间的相互贸易又使得消费所有产品成为可能。

（2）规模经济和市场结构①规模经济的分类a．外部规模经济，指单位产品成本取决于整个行业规模而非单个厂商规模的规模经济类型。

b．内部规模经济，指单位产品成本取决于单个厂商的规模而不是其所在的行业规模的规模经济类型。

②规模经济对市场结构的影响外部的和内部的规模经济对市场结构具有不同的影响。

一个只存在外部规模经济的行业（即大厂商没有优势）一般由许多相对较小的厂商构成，且处于完全竞争的状态；相反，存在内部规模经济的行业中，大厂商比小厂商更具有成本优势，就形成了不完全竞争的市场结构。

外部规模经济和内部规模经济都是国际贸易的重要原因。

但是，由于它们对市场结构的影响不同，下面将对它们进行分别讨论。

十万种考研考证电子书、题库、视频学习平台第10章发展中国家的贸易政策10.1 复习笔记1．进口替代战略（1）含义及特征进口替代战略又称内向型发展战略，其基本特征是以国内生产的工业制成品代替进口品，满足国内需求，并以此带动国民经济增长。

（2）一般做法①首先发展相对简易的日用工业，然后发展重化工业。

②压缩政府的不必要开支，增加生产性投资比重。

③对建立替代工业所必须的机器设备、中间品或原料进口采取关税减免和政府补贴的优惠政策。

④通过关税、非关税壁垒以及高估本国币值的方式，限制一般工业品进口，同时保证资本品以较低价格进口。

（3）幼稚工业论（幼稚工业论是进口替代战略的指导思想）①含义发展中国家具有制造业的潜在的比较优势，但发展中国家新建的制造工业最初却不能与发达国家已经成熟完善的制造业竞争。

为了使新成长的制造业获得立足之地，政府应该暂时地给予支持，直到它们足够强大，能够参与国际竞争为止。

②注意之处十万种考研考证电子书、题库、视频学习平台a．试图从现在就进入未来才会具有比较优势的产业，并不总能得到好处。

b．如果政府保护本身有助于培养制造业的竞争力，那么保护才是值得的。

反之，则不值得。

总之，只有存在某种国内市场失灵的情况下，幼稚工业论才能成为政府干预的有效论据。

③市场失灵幼稚工业是否需要保护取决于幼稚工业的保护必须与一种具体的市场失灵相联系，这种市场失灵会使得私有市场不能以应有的速度发展这一产业。

有两种类型的市场失灵可以作为保护幼稚工业的依据：不完全资本市场和无偿占用问题。

a．不完全资本市场作为保护幼稚工业的依据认为，如果一个发展中国家没有一整套金融机构可以使得传统部门的储蓄用于新成长部门的投资，那么新工业部门的增长将会受这些工业当前盈利能力的限制。

最优政策是建立更完善的资本市场。

但是，由于对这些幼稚工业的保护可以提高利润，从而使其更快成长，所以保护幼稚工业可以作为次优的政策选择。

b．无偿占用问题的思想是：新产业产生的社会福利没有得到补偿。

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.。