La apertura al comercio exterior y sus efectos sobre la productividad en presencia de diferencias intersectoriales

  1. Navas Ruiz, Antonio
Journal:
Cuadernos de economía: Spanish Journal of Economics and Finance

ISSN: 2340-6704,  0210-0266

Year of publication: 2010

Volume: 33

Issue: 92

Pages: 139-170

Type: Article

DOI: 10.1016/S0210-0266(10)70067-4 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openBiblos-e Archivo editor

More publications in: Cuadernos de economía: Spanish Journal of Economics and Finance

Sustainable development goals

Abstract

This paper explores the relationship between trade openness, competition and productivity growth, in a multi-sector R&D endogenous growth model where we allow for sectorial differences in competition levels. A movement from autarky to free trade extends the size of the market but it increases competition within each market. The joint effect rises the output produced per firm, R&D employment and productivity growth. When we allow for sectorial differences, the less competitive sectors obtain larger gains in efficiency, increasing by more R&D investment and productivity growth. Moreover, R&D employment in the most competitive sectors may reduce due to a crowding-out effect from the less competitive sectors: The latter, increases the demand for rival inputs, attracting labor from R&D and production activities of the other sectors.

Bibliographic References

  • AGHION, P.; HARRIS, C.; HOWITT, P. y VICKERS, J. (2001 ), «Competition, Imitation and Growth wilh Step-by-Step Innovation». Review of Economic Studies, 68(3), págs. 467-492.
  • ATKESON. A . YBURSTEI , A . (2010), Innovation, Firm Dynamics, ami Intemational Trade, mimeo.
  • BERNARD, A. : EATON, J. ; JENSEN, J. B. Y KORTUM, S. (2003), «Plants and Productivity in lnternational Trade», American Economic Review, 93 (4), págs. 1268-1290.
  • BRANDER, J. (1981), Intra-industry Trade in Identical Commoditie, Journal of lnternational Economics, 11(1), 1-14.
  • BRANDER, J. Y KRUGMAN, P. (1983), «A Reciprocal Dumping' Model of Intemational Trade», Journal of lnternational Economics, 15(3-4), págs. 313-321.
  • BERNHOFEN, D. (1999), Intra-industry Trade and Strategic Interaction: Theory and Evidence , Journal of lnternational Economics, 47(1), págs. 225-24.
  • BLOOM, N.; DRACA, M. y VAN REENEN, J. (2008), Trade Induced Technical Change: The impact of Chinese Imports on IT and Innovation, mimeo.
  • BUGAMELLI, M .; FABIANI, S. y SETTE, E. (2008), The Pro-competitive Effect of Imports from China: An Analysis on Firm-level Price Data, mimeo.
  • BUSTOS, P. (2007), Trade liberalization, Exports and Technology Upgrading: Evidence on the Impact of MERCOSUR on Argentinean Firms, mimeo.
  • CELLlNI, R. y LAMBERTINI, L. (2004), R&D Incentives and Market Structure: A Dynamic Analysis, mimeo.
  • CHEN, N.; IMBS, J. y SCOTT, A. (2009), «The Dynamics of Trade and Competition», Journal of International Economics, 77( 1), págs. 50-62.
  • DEVEREUX, M . y LAPHAM, B. (1994), «The Stability of Economic lntegration and Endogenous Growth», The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109( 1), págs. 299-305.
  • EDERINGTON, J. y MCCALMAN, P. (2007), The Impact of Trade Liberalization on Productivity Within and across Industries: Theory and Evidence, mimeo.
  • ESLAVA, M.; KUGLER, M. y HALTlWANGER, J. (2009), «Trade Reforms and Market Selection: Evidence from Manufacturing Plants in Colombia», NBER WP 14935.
  • FERSHTMAN, C. ( 1987), Identification of Classes of Differential Games for Which the OpenLoop is a degenerated Feedback Nash Equilibrium , Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, 55(2), págs. 217-31.
  • FERSHTMAN, C. y MULLER, E. (1984), «Capital Accumulation Games of Infinite Duration» , Journal of Economic Theory, 33(2), págs. 322-339.
  • GRIFFITH, R. ; HARRISON, R. y SIMPSON, H. (2006), «The Link Between Product Market Reform, Innovation and EU Macroeconomic Performance», European Economy Economic Papers, 243.
  • GROSSMAN, G. y HELPMAN, E. (1991), Innovation and Growlh in the Global Economy, The MIT Press.
  • IMPULLlTI, G. y LICANDRO, O. (2009), Trade, Firm Selection, and Innovation: The Competition Channel, mimeo.
  • JONES, C. (2002), Introduction to Economic Growt. WW. Norton Univ. Press.
  • KOENINGER, W. y LlCANDRO, O. (2006), «On the Use of Substitutability as a Measure of Competition» , BE Topics on Macroeconomics, 6(6).
  • LICANDRO, O. y NAVAS, A. (2010), «Trade Liberalization, Competition and Growth», Working Papers Instituto de Análisis Eco. (IAE).
  • LILEEVA, A. y TREFLER, D. (2007), «Improved Access to Foreign Markets Raises Plant-Level Productivity for Sorne Plants», NBER WP 13297.
  • MELITZ, M. (2003), «The Impact ofTrade on lntra-Industry Reallocation and Aggregate lndustry Productivity», Econometrica, 71 (6), págs. 1695-1725.
  • MELlTZ, M. y OTTAVIANO, G. (2008), «Market Size, Trade and Productivity», Review of Economic Studies, 75( 1), 295-316.
  • NAVAS, A Y SALA, D. (2007), «Technology Adoption and the Selection Effect of Trade», EUI ECO 200 17/58.
  • NEARY, P. (2009), International Trade in General Oligopolistic Equilibrium, mimeo.
  • PERETTO, P. ( 1999), «Cost Reduction, Entry, and the Interdependence of Market Structure and Economic Growth», Journal of Monetary Economics, 43(1), págs. 173-195.
  • PERETTO, P. (2003), «Endogenous Market Structure, and the Growth and Welfare Effects of Economic Integration» , Journal of International Economics, 60( 1), págs. 177-201 .
  • REINGANUM, J. ( 1982), «A Class of Differential Games for Which the Closed Loop and Open Loop Nash Equilibria Coincide», Journal of Optimizarion Theory and Applications, 36(2), págs. 253-262.
  • RIVERA-BATIZ, L. y ROMER, P. (1991), «Economic Integration and Endogenous Growth», The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(2), págs. 531-556.
  • ROMER, P. (1990), «Endogenous Technological Change», Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), págs. 71-102.
  • TRACA, D. (2002), Imports as Competitive Discipline: The Role of the Productivity Gap, Journal of Development Economics, 69 ( 1), págs. 1-21.
  • VIVES (2008), Innovation and competitive pressure, Joumal of Industrial Economics, vol. 56,núm. 3 págs. 419-469.
Data source: Dialnet