Endogenous Growth and Trade Liberalization Between Small and Large Countries

The paper combines insight from new trade theory and R&D-based endogenous growth models to argue that there are ambiguous growth effects of trade liberalization between countries that differ in terms of the size of their home markets. In particular, trade liberalization may reduce R&D incentives in countries with low purchasing power without invoking parallel increases in countries with high purchasing power. The paper also considers the case of imperfect international knowledge spillovers, and demonstrates that complete trade liberalization may affect the growth rate negatively.     

The European economy in an expanding world

Summary Postwar economic development in Europe can be subdivided in two periods. In the first subperiod 1950–1973 growth is determined by catching up vis-d-vis the US. The second subperiod 1973–1993 is characterised by a reorientation with respect to the international division of labour. This sets the stage for future developments, which are presented in the form of three different scenarios. In the European Decline scenario Europe cannot match developments in the US and Japan. As appears from a scenario called Fortress Europe import protection provides no sensible solution. To compete on a world scale Europe needs more technological dynamics as sketched in the European Recovery scenario. Calculations of future paths are based on the WorldScan model of the Central Planning Bureau.Theo van de Klundert is Professor of Economics at Tilburg University. Ben Geurts and Hans Timmer are staff members of the Central Planning Bureau, The Hague. We are indebted to Martin Fase and Simon Kuipers for useful comments on an earlier version of the paper.     

Trade policy under imperfect competition: The economics of Russian roulette

Summary Neo-classical economic theory shows that managed trade or protectionism is (almost) always welfare decreasing. However, measurements of the welfare costs of protectionism based on neo-classical models seem to suggest that these costs are quite small. We discuss general new insights and developments in the theory, policy and empiricism of international trade. The observation that intra-industry trade and the services sector are important has led to a shift in theory away from constant returns to scale and perfect competition towards economies of scale and scope, externalities, market imperfections, and imperfect competition. Although this, in principle, opens the door to beneficial government intervention in the economic process, we emphasize that the true costs of protection can potentially be much higher than is generally acknowledged as a result of the above mentioned shift.We would like to thank, without implicating, Martin Fase, Harry Garretsen, Catrinus Jepma, Simon Kuipers, Ger Lanjouw, Tenn Schmidt, Albert de Vaal, and Jean-Marie Viaene for stimulating conversations and useful suggestions. We thank Thijs Knaap for excellent research assistance.     

DOES GNP EXAGGERATE GROWTH IN “ACTUAL” OUTPUT? THE CASE OF THE UNITED STATES

Measures of national product can be misleading because there is nonmarket production. There are also distortions due to transactional activities, which are expenditures to support transactions, not actual output consumed. For 1950–89, this study recalculates output for the United States, adjusting for transactional activities and nonmarket production. Due to relatively rapid growth in transactional activities, GNP overstates output growth in the 1950s; because there was slow expansion of transactional activities in the early 1970s, GNP understates actual output. Since 1974, increases in transactional activities and shifts to market production lead GNP to exaggerate improvement of "actual" output per capita.