AGEC 340 – International Economic Development C ourse slides for week 12 (Mar. 30-Apr. 1) Globalization and Comparative

1. AGEC 340 – International Economic DevelopmentCourse slides for week 12 (Mar. 30-Apr. 1)Globalization and Comparative Advantage* Can free trade really make us richer? * If you are following the textbook, this is chapter 16

2. So far…we’ve explained prices and quantities in terms of market equilibrium between supply and demand Price ($/lb) 1.25 S 1.00 0.75 D Quantity (thousands of tons/yr) 10 15 17

3. …but usually trade is available, so our price is determined by equilibrium with trade For exported goods For imported goods Price ($/lb) Price ($/lb) 1.25 1.25 S S 1.00 1.00 0.75 0.75 D D 10 17 10 17 Exports = 7 Imports = 7

4. …and governments often restrict trade, so our price is determined by trade and policy For exported goods For imported goods Price ($/lb) Price ($/lb) Tax on exporting ($0.10/lb) 1.25 1.25 S S 1.15 1.00 1.00 Tax on importing ($0.10/lb) 0.85 0.75 0.75 D D 10 17 10 17 Exports = 7 Imports = 7

5. In terms of economic surplus, adjusting to foreign prices creates gains from trade For exported goods For imported goods Price ($/lb) Price ($/lb) 1.25 1.25 S S 1.00 1.00 0.75 0.75 D D 10 17 10 17 Exports = 7 Imports = 7

6. In terms of economic surplus, a trade restriction cuts some of the gains from trade For exported goods For imported goods Price ($/lb) Price ($/lb) Tax on exporting ($0.10/lb) 1.25 1.25 S S 1.15 1.00 1.00 Tax on importing ($0.10/lb) 0.85 0.75 0.75 D D 10 17 10 17 Exports = 7 Imports = 7

7. The textbook describes another way to look at comparative advantage… Your textbook, page 318

8. To see this view of comparative advantage,let’s start by looking first at what it is not • Comparative advantage is not “absolute advantage” • Absolute advantage would be a lower cost per unit of output • in terms of the quantity of inputs used • ex.: more bushels/acre, so fewer acres/bushel • ex.: more units/hour, so fewer hours/unit • in terms of the money cost of inputs • ex.: lower cost of land • ex.: lower cost of labor • Comparative advantage is a lower cost relative to other options

9. To understand comparative advantage, it’s helpful to use a familiar example • In US agriculture, why do Indiana & Kansas grow what we grow? These two states are roughly similar, but Kansas has less rain & lower yields: • Approximate crop yields, Indiana and Kansas (bu/acre) • IN KS • Corn 130 75 • Wheat 55 50 • Who and what has an absolute advantage? • …and who actually grows what? why?

10. To predict what farmers will grow, we can use a PPF diagram for a typical acre in each state. Assuming all other costs per acre are equal: Q of corn (bu/ac) Indiana 130 we can draw the line straight if there’s no interaction between the two crops 55 Q of wheat (bu/ac)

11. Kansas has lower yields of both crops,but which crop do farmers grow? Q of corn (bu/ac) Q of corn (bu/ac) Indiana Kansas 130 75 55 50 Q of wheat (bu/ac)

12. As always, economists expect they’ll grow whichever maximizes profit Q of corn (bu/ac) Indiana Kansas 130 75 50 55 Q of wheat (bu/ac)

13. We need to know prices, to get the slope of the iso-revenue lines, e.g. : at recent prices Pwheat/Pcorn = -4/2.5 = -1.6 Q of corn (bu/ac) Indiana Kansas 130 75 50 55 Q of wheat (bu/ac)

14. The iso-revenue line is flatter than the Indiana PPF, and steeper than the Kansas PPF slope of isorev. lines: Pwheat/Pcorn =-4/2.5 =-1.6 Q of corn (bu/ac) Indiana Kansas 130 slope of Indiana PPF = -130/55 = -2.36 slope of Kansas PPF = -75/50 = -1.5 75 50 55 Q of wheat (bu/ac)

15. This helps explain why Indiana specializes in corn while Kansas specializes in wheat. slope of isorev. lines: Pwheat/Pcorn =-4/2.5 =-1.6 Q of corn (bu/ac) Indiana Kansas 130 slope of Indiana PPF = -130/55 = -2.36 slope of Kansas PPF = -75/50 = -1.5 75 50 55 Q of wheat (bu/ac)

16. Growing the “wrong” crop in each place would simply give lower revenue in that place. slope of isorev. lines: Pwheat/Pcorn =-4/2.5 =-1.6 Q of corn (bu/ac) Indiana Kansas 130 slope of Indiana PPF = -130/55 = -2.36 slope of Kansas PPF = -75/50 = -1.5 75 50 55 Q of wheat (bu/ac)

17. This is exactly the same idea as was shown in supply-demand diagrams Indiana exports corn…. ...and imports wheat S S Pwheat c c Pcorn c D D Qd Qs Qs Qd Imports = Qd-Qs Exports = Qs-Qd

18. To conclude, we can sat that Indiana grows corn and Kansas grows wheat, simply becauseit’s in each state’s comparative advantage to grow what they grow best, compared to their own alternatives. The same idea is why any country (or any individual person) is often better off specializing in something to trade with others. Self-sufficiency may sound good, but it’s often very costly!

19. So... • What sectors do different countries have a comparative advantage? • the US? • other industrialized countries? • very poor countries

20. So... • What sectors do different countries want to have a comparative advantage? • the US? • other industrialized countries? • very poor countries

21. So, what trade patterns do we see?Is the pattern of comparative advantage fixed? Our textbook data:

22. In conclusion… • Countries (and regions) can reach their highest possible level of real income through open trade with the rest of the world. • What they trade depends on their comparative advantage, by exporting what is relatively cheap for them to sell, and importing what is relatively valuable; • The pattern of comparative advantage changes over time, and depends on local technologies, resources and consumer preferences.