A Case for Trade Liberalization in Developing Countries

Topics: Developed country, Economics, International trade Pages: 12 (4003 words) Published: October 29, 2005
"Economies that sign free trade agreements tend to see an increase in their overall growth rates of about 0.6 percent annually during the first five years after implementation – gross domestic product is about 3 percent higher at the end of five years as a result of an agreement" (DR-CAFTA).

Trade liberalization is becoming more prevalent around the globe. Many argue its shortcomings and benefits for all parties involved, but none can argue the theoretical and empirical evidence arguing for free trade between specializing nations. Although no model perfectly represents what truly happens in the real world, it can begin to show the direction in which a nation needs to follow to benefit from free trade. Developed countries are practically guaranteed to benefit from free trade, but it is also true the developing countries benefit. With financial help in the form of investment and the formation of regulations and policies, developing countries can benefit just as much from trade as already developed countries. Economic Models for Trade:

Ricardian Model
To fully understand free trade, it is important to understand the modern economic models that attempt to explain it and show its significance. The most basic model for trade is the Ricardian Model, developed by David Ricardo. By using the idea of comparative advantage, the Ricardian model begins to shape the theory that trade between nations is in fact desirable. This model starts with a straight line representing the production possibilities for two goods within a nation. The straight line covers the assumptions that consumers have no preference between imported and domestic goods, and that there is perfect competition between these two countries and each country has a fixed amount of resources to work with (Yarbrough 28). Within these assumptions, including the assumption that technology remains constant between the two countries, the model demonstrates that each country would benefit from trade. The country that uses comparatively less labor and capital to produce a good than the second country would export that good to the second country. By freeing up the labor and capital within the second country from importing the good, it can now all be used to produce more of the second good to export to the first country (see Figure 1). This creates specialization, and a surplus of capital and labor that can now be used for economic growth. Since each country now has two options of getting the goods they need, which are producing domestically or trading internationally, they will choose the option that is most beneficial to them according to the opportunity cost. Both countries will gain from trading (Yarbrough 38-41). Figure 1

Neoclassical Model
Over time, nations have learned to specialize in what they are best at producing, whether it is a labor intensive or capital intensive good or service. This model is a good starting point in understanding the importance and efficiency of trade between nations, but it is a simplified model that takes many assumptions along with it. One problem stems from the fact that nations in reality do not specialize entirely in the one good that is most efficient for them to produce. The Neoclassical, or increasing-cost, model accounts for this by comparing relative prices instead of just a unit of opportunity cost, like the Ricardian Model (Yarbrough 76). This causes the production possibilities frontier to be curved instead of just a straight line. In creating the curved line, as the country moves along the frontier, they are giving up more and more of one good to produce the second good, and eventually it is not worth the loss of so many of one good to gain another unit of the first good. Therefore, they do not produce all of one good, but it still proves beneficial to specialize in that one good (Yarbrough 76). Heckscher-Ohlin Theorem

Going a step further, the Heckscher-Ohlin Theorem states that a...

Bibliography: Anderson, Sarah; John Cavanagh. Field Guide to the Global Economy. New York, NY: The New York Press, 2000.
Bhagwati, Jagdish. In Defense of Globalization. New York, NY. Oxford University Press, 2004.
Bulmer-Thomas, Victor. "The Central American Common Market: From Closed to Open Regionalism." World Development. 26.2. London: Elsevier Science Ltd. (1998): 313-321.
Hakim, Peter. "Western Hemisphere Free Trade: Why Should Latin America Be Interested?" Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 526 (March, 1993): 121-134.
Moss, Ambler. "Toward a Free Trade Area of the Americas: Progress and Prospects." The Challenge of Change in Latin America and the Caribbean. Ed. Jeffrey Stark. Miami: North-South Center Press, 2001. 162-173.
Willmore, L.N. "Free Trade in Manufactures among Developing Countries: The Central American Experience." Economic Development and Cultural Change. 20.4. (1972): 659-670. Online. JSTOR. 6 Sept 2005.
Yarbrough, Beth & Robert. The World Economy: Trade and Finance. 5th ed. Fort Worth: Harcourt College Publishers, 2000.
Continue Reading

Please join StudyMode to read the full document

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Essay on International Trade and Developing Countries
  • Advantages of trade liberalization Essay
  • Trade Liberalization in South Asian Countries Essay
  • Trade Liberalization Essay
  • Logistics and Trade in the Future in Developing Countries Essay
  • Trade Liberalization Essay
  • Impact of Trade Liberalization of Bangladesh Essay
  • Global Free Trade Is Raising the Standard of Living in Developing Countries. Essay

Become a StudyMode Member

Sign Up - It's Free