Author
Listed:
- Dong-Sung Cho
(Seoul National University, Korea)
- Hwy-Chang Moon
(Seoul National University, Korea)
Abstract
The rhetoric of competitiveness—the view that, in the words of President Clinton, each nation is "like a big corporation competing in the global marketplace"—has become pervasive. According to Krugman, competitiveness poses three dangers. First, it could result in the waste of money to enhance US. competitiveness. Second, it could lead protectionism and trade wars. Finally, it could result in bad public policy. Here are his key points and responses by others. Krugman argues that trade is not a zero-sum game, while competition between firms is a zero-sum game. Prestowitz responds that Krugman is correct in the case of trade between the United States and Costa Rica, but not between the United States and Europe. Krugman argues that a country's economic fortunes are determined not by its success on world markets, but by its domestic productiviy. Thurow responds that if the domestic economy is to succeed in productivity, it must first compete successfully in the global economy. Krugman warns that an obsession with competitiveness is dangerous and advises cathecting onto productivity. Cohen responds that an exclusive focus on productivity has some dangers. Krugman counter-responds that if the concept of competitiveness cannot be well defined, it should not be used to guide policy.The debate is highly intellectual and practical, but sometimes confusing. The knowledge of trade models discussed in Chapter 1 is useful in evaluating this debate. For example, Krugman argues that many policy makers and economists are mercantilists because they view trade as a zero-sum game. However, Krugman can also be criticized for not clearly distinguishing between competitive advantage and comparative advantage as a basis of a nation's competitiveness. There are two important issues in this debate. First, it is difficult to define competitiveness. Second, trade balance may not be a good measure for competitiveness. We need a new, comprehensive model that can effectively deal with these two issues. For this purpose, Michael Porter has provided the diamond model, which will be discussed in Chapter 3.
Suggested Citation
Dong-Sung Cho & Hwy-Chang Moon, 2000.
"Traditional Model: Debate,"
World Scientific Book Chapters, in: From Adam Smith To Michael Porter Evolution of Competitiveness Theory, chapter 2, pages 21-54,
World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
Handle:
RePEc:wsi:wschap:9789812385222_0002
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wsi:wschap:9789812385222_0002. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Tai Tone Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscientific.com/page/worldscibooks .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.