Trade and growth with heterogeneous firms revisited

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

In a recent paper, Baldwin and Robert-Nicoud (2008) explore the growth and welfare effects of trade liberalization in a model with firm heterogeneity that allows for endogenous growth and a diversity of innovation mechanisms. Their main welfare conclusion is that freer trade has an unambiguously positive static effect while the sign of the dynamic effect, stemming from the change in the growth rate of varieties, depends on the type of technology imposed for innovations. This paper revisits these conclusions. By carefully following algebraic expressions in the original work, we point at inaccuracies and explore their consequences. Our main finding is that the sign of the static effect is not always positive. Consumers may experience an immediate loss from openness if the value of the firms they own decreases due to greater import competition. Moreover, the sign of the static effect on expenditure is always the opposite to that of the dynamic effect stemming from variety growth, so the results presented here highlight the existing tension between static and dynamic effects. Our results speak to the most recent literature on welfare effects in trade models.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)194-202
JournalJournal of International Economics
Volume100
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2016
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Trade and growth
Heterogeneous firms
Dynamic effects
Welfare effects
Innovation
Import competition
Endogenous growth
Firm heterogeneity
Trade liberalization
Consumer experience
Free trade
Expenditure
Openness

Keywords

  • trade and endogenous growth
  • heterogeneous firms
  • dynamic versus static efficiency
  • variable barriers to trade
  • technical barriers to trade

Cite this

@article{88d32889e8b74f9882296daf1c212d56,
title = "Trade and growth with heterogeneous firms revisited",
abstract = "In a recent paper, Baldwin and Robert-Nicoud (2008) explore the growth and welfare effects of trade liberalization in a model with firm heterogeneity that allows for endogenous growth and a diversity of innovation mechanisms. Their main welfare conclusion is that freer trade has an unambiguously positive static effect while the sign of the dynamic effect, stemming from the change in the growth rate of varieties, depends on the type of technology imposed for innovations. This paper revisits these conclusions. By carefully following algebraic expressions in the original work, we point at inaccuracies and explore their consequences. Our main finding is that the sign of the static effect is not always positive. Consumers may experience an immediate loss from openness if the value of the firms they own decreases due to greater import competition. Moreover, the sign of the static effect on expenditure is always the opposite to that of the dynamic effect stemming from variety growth, so the results presented here highlight the existing tension between static and dynamic effects. Our results speak to the most recent literature on welfare effects in trade models.",
keywords = "trade and endogenous growth, heterogeneous firms, dynamic versus static efficiency, variable barriers to trade, technical barriers to trade",
author = "Guzman Ourens",
year = "2016",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1016/j.jinteco.2016.03.006",
language = "English",
volume = "100",
pages = "194--202",
journal = "Journal of International Economics",
issn = "0022-1996",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

Trade and growth with heterogeneous firms revisited. / Ourens, Guzman.

In: Journal of International Economics, Vol. 100, 05.2016, p. 194-202.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Trade and growth with heterogeneous firms revisited

AU - Ourens, Guzman

PY - 2016/5

Y1 - 2016/5

N2 - In a recent paper, Baldwin and Robert-Nicoud (2008) explore the growth and welfare effects of trade liberalization in a model with firm heterogeneity that allows for endogenous growth and a diversity of innovation mechanisms. Their main welfare conclusion is that freer trade has an unambiguously positive static effect while the sign of the dynamic effect, stemming from the change in the growth rate of varieties, depends on the type of technology imposed for innovations. This paper revisits these conclusions. By carefully following algebraic expressions in the original work, we point at inaccuracies and explore their consequences. Our main finding is that the sign of the static effect is not always positive. Consumers may experience an immediate loss from openness if the value of the firms they own decreases due to greater import competition. Moreover, the sign of the static effect on expenditure is always the opposite to that of the dynamic effect stemming from variety growth, so the results presented here highlight the existing tension between static and dynamic effects. Our results speak to the most recent literature on welfare effects in trade models.

AB - In a recent paper, Baldwin and Robert-Nicoud (2008) explore the growth and welfare effects of trade liberalization in a model with firm heterogeneity that allows for endogenous growth and a diversity of innovation mechanisms. Their main welfare conclusion is that freer trade has an unambiguously positive static effect while the sign of the dynamic effect, stemming from the change in the growth rate of varieties, depends on the type of technology imposed for innovations. This paper revisits these conclusions. By carefully following algebraic expressions in the original work, we point at inaccuracies and explore their consequences. Our main finding is that the sign of the static effect is not always positive. Consumers may experience an immediate loss from openness if the value of the firms they own decreases due to greater import competition. Moreover, the sign of the static effect on expenditure is always the opposite to that of the dynamic effect stemming from variety growth, so the results presented here highlight the existing tension between static and dynamic effects. Our results speak to the most recent literature on welfare effects in trade models.

KW - trade and endogenous growth

KW - heterogeneous firms

KW - dynamic versus static efficiency

KW - variable barriers to trade

KW - technical barriers to trade

U2 - 10.1016/j.jinteco.2016.03.006

DO - 10.1016/j.jinteco.2016.03.006

M3 - Article

VL - 100

SP - 194

EP - 202

JO - Journal of International Economics

JF - Journal of International Economics

SN - 0022-1996

ER -