IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/van/wpaper/vuecon-sub-18-00009.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A lab-equipment model of growth with heterogeneous firms and asymmetric countries

Author

Listed:
  • Takumi Naito

    (Vanderbilt University and Waseda University)

Abstract

To examine the effects of asymmetric trade liberalization on countries' long-run growth and welfare through intraindustry reallocations, we extend the Rivera-Batiz--Romer lab-equipment model of growth with expanding input varieties to include both heterogeneous firms and asymmetric countries. We first derive extended ACR (Arkolakis--Costinot--Rodriguez-Clare) formulas for long-run growth and welfare changes even with asymmetric countries. In our baseline calculation, the total long-run welfare effect of greater openness (expressed in flow terms) is about four times as large as the static counterpart. Finally, we show that even unilateral trade liberalization always raises both countries' long-run growth and welfare.

Suggested Citation

  • Takumi Naito, 2018. "A lab-equipment model of growth with heterogeneous firms and asymmetric countries," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 18-00009, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:van:wpaper:vuecon-sub-18-00009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.accessecon.com/pubs/VUECON/VUECON-18-00009.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jesse Perla & Christopher Tonetti & Michael E. Waugh, 2021. "Equilibrium Technology Diffusion, Trade, and Growth," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(1), pages 73-128, January.
    2. Baldwin, Richard E. & Robert-Nicoud, Frederic, 2008. "Trade and growth with heterogeneous firms," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 21-34, January.
    3. Balistreri, Edward J. & Hillberry, Russell H. & Rutherford, Thomas F., 2011. "Structural estimation and solution of international trade models with heterogeneous firms," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 95-108, March.
    4. Krugman, Paul, 1980. "Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the Pattern of Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 950-959, December.
    5. Antoni Estevadeordal & Alan M. Taylor, 2013. "Is the Washington Consensus Dead? Growth, Openness, and the Great Liberalization, 1970s–2000s," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(5), pages 1669-1690, December.
    6. Thomas Sampson, 2016. "Dynamic Selection: An Idea Flows Theory of Entry, Trade, and Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 131(1), pages 315-380.
    7. Francisco L. Rivera-Batiz & Luis A. Rivera-Batiz, 2018. "Economic Integration and Endogenous Growth," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Francisco L Rivera-Batiz & Luis A Rivera-Batiz (ed.), International Trade, Capital Flows and Economic Development, chapter 1, pages 3-32, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Naito, Takumi, 2017. "Growth and welfare effects of unilateral trade liberalization with heterogeneous firms and asymmetric countries," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 167-173.
    9. Andrew Atkeson & Ariel Tomás Burstein, 2010. "Innovation, Firm Dynamics, and International Trade," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(3), pages 433-484, June.
    10. Daron Acemoglu, 2002. "Directed Technical Change," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 69(4), pages 781-809.
    11. Romain Wacziarg & Karen Horn Welch, 2008. "Trade Liberalization and Growth: New Evidence," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 22(2), pages 187-231, June.
    12. Costas Arkolakis & Arnaud Costinot & Andres Rodriguez-Clare, 2012. "New Trade Models, Same Old Gains?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(1), pages 94-130, February.
    13. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2004. "Trade Costs," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(3), pages 691-751, September.
    14. Peter Gustafsson & Paul Segerstrom, 2010. "Trade Liberalization and Productivity Growth," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(2), pages 207-228, May.
    15. Felbermayr, Gabriel & Jung, Benjamin & Larch, Mario, 2013. "Optimal tariffs, retaliation, and the welfare loss from tariff wars in the Melitz model," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 13-25.
    16. Ourens, Guzmán, 2016. "Trade and growth with heterogeneous firms revisited," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 194-202.
    17. Marc J. Melitz, 2003. "The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(6), pages 1695-1725, November.
    18. Demidova, Svetlana & Rodríguez-Clare, Andrés, 2013. "The simple analytics of the Melitz model in a small economy," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 266-272.
    19. Dinopoulos, Elias & Unel, Bulent, 2011. "Quality heterogeneity and global economic growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(5), pages 595-612, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Takumi Naito, 2021. "Can The Optimal Tariff Be Zero For A Growing Large Country?," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 62(3), pages 1237-1280, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Takumi Naito, 2021. "Can The Optimal Tariff Be Zero For A Growing Large Country?," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 62(3), pages 1237-1280, August.
    2. Guzmán Ourens, 2020. "The long-term impact of trade with firm heterogeneity," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 156(4), pages 887-919, November.
    3. Naito, Takumi, 2017. "Growth and welfare effects of unilateral trade liberalization with heterogeneous firms and asymmetric countries," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 167-173.
    4. Naito, Takumi, 2017. "An asymmetric Melitz model of trade and growth," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 80-83.
    5. Etro, Federico, 2017. "Research in economics and macroeconomics," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 373-383.
    6. Nishiyama, Hiroyuki & Gintani, Yasuhiro & Tsuboi, Mizuki, 2024. "The impact of trade on growth and welfare with heterogeneous firms and rent-sharing," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 89(PB), pages 731-742.
    7. Naito, Takumi, 2012. "A Ricardian model of trade and growth with endogenous trade status," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 80-88.
    8. Ourens, Guzmán, 2016. "Trade and growth with heterogeneous firms revisited," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 194-202.
    9. Kishi, Keiichi & Okada, Keisuke, 2018. "Trade Liberalization, Technology Diffusion, and Productivity," MPRA Paper 88597, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Kishi, Keiichi & Okada, Keisuke, 2021. "The impact of trade liberalization on productivity distribution under the presence of technology diffusion and innovation," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    11. Paul S. Segerstrom & Ignat Stepanok, 2018. "Learning How To Export," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 120(1), pages 63-92, January.
    12. Maemir, H. & Ziesemer, T., 2014. "Multinational production and trade in an endogenous growth model with heterogeneous firms," MERIT Working Papers 2014-038, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    13. Costinot, Arnaud & Rodríguez-Clare, Andrés, 2014. "Trade Theory with Numbers: Quantifying the Consequences of Globalization," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 197-261, Elsevier.
    14. Francisco J. Buera & Ezra Oberfield, 2020. "The Global Diffusion of Ideas," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(1), pages 83-114, January.
    15. Thomas Sampson, 2016. "Dynamic Selection: An Idea Flows Theory of Entry, Trade, and Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 131(1), pages 315-380.
    16. Haruyama, Tetsugen & Zhao, Laixun, 2017. "Trade and firm heterogeneity in a Schumpeterian model of growth," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 540-563.
    17. Swati Dhingra & Hanwei Huang & Gianmarco Ottaviano & João Paulo Pessoa & Thomas Sampson & John Van Reenen, 2017. "The costs and benefits of leaving the EU: trade effects," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 32(92), pages 651-705.
    18. Philipp J. H. Schröder & Allan Sørensen, 2014. "A Welfare Ranking of Multilateral Reductions in Real and Tariff Trade Barriers when Firms are Heterogenous," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 423-443, August.
    19. Jesse Perla & Christopher Tonetti & Michael E. Waugh, 2021. "Equilibrium Technology Diffusion, Trade, and Growth," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(1), pages 73-128, January.
    20. Nicholas Bloom & Paul Romer & Stephen J Terry & John Van Reenen, 2021. "Trapped Factors and China’s Impact on Global Growth [Competition and innovation: an inverted-U relationship]," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(633), pages 156-191.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F1 - International Economics - - Trade

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:van:wpaper:vuecon-sub-18-00009. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: John P. Conley (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.vanderbilt.edu/econ/wparchive/index.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.