Reagarding intra-firm trade there is some data put out by UN's World
Investment Report. This comes out every year, I haven't had a chance to
look at the most recent report (I will soon though, it's used for my
class). Over-specialization (depending on products and process used) can
lead to the typical problem of declining terms of trade, misallocation of
resources, lock-in effects, that is difficult to diversify out from the
low-end, and in some high value added activities, the income effect while
favorable is often detrimental to income distribution, since other sectors
are growing much more slowly.
Cheers, Anthony
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Anthony P. D'Costa
Associate Professor Ph: (253) 692-4462
Comparative International Development Fax: (253) 692-5718
University of Washington Box Number: 358436
1900 Commerce Street
Tacoma, WA 98402, USA
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Tue, 19 Dec 2000, ALI KADRI wrote:
> Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 00:45:01 -0800 (PST)
> From: ALI KADRI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [PEN-L:6387] Query onTrade
>
> I am presently researching Trade issues. I recall Bill
> Tabb in a monthly review article mentioning that the
> increase in global trade is due to inter-company
> trade. Maybe my memory is not all that clear on that
> but are there data and measurement sources for this.
>
> Evidently all trade has been inter firm trade, what
> has changed is the fact that much of it is in
> intermediate products- Charles Andrews correctly
> mentioned it. But how can the welfare effect to the
> developing countries be measured, account taken of
> data problems. I have of course measurement
> problems, the least of which are data sources, double
> counting, nature of production process, income effect
> of trade vs. liberalization effect. There is evidence,
> and that is the major point, of corrosion (supplanting
> national industries and in free capital regimes the
> resource cum capital transfer is a bottomless hole),
> in the national economy resulting from an
> over-emphasis on specialization and comparative
> advantage, can these be gauged in any concrete way.
> Basically should an increase in exports become
> translated in income growth. There has been cases (
> indeed the majority of cases between 1960 qnd 1980) of
> higher growth in incomes with lower exports some
> twenty years back.
> Some of the all too well known results are as follows:
> Science and scale based products, e. transistors,
> valves data processors, are high growth export
> products. One can add garments to this as well.
> The year 1990 represents a break point for most
> products except scale and science based which seem
> grow steadily without a break in the series (maybe
> there is a slight change in the slope after 1996 WTO
> effect), but this is too early to measure.
> the growth rate in the shares of world trade follows
> the descending order science based, scale based,
> specialized supplier, labor intensive resource
> intensive, primary commodities at the bottom.
> I appreciate comments or references on this
>
> --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > michael,
> > the reason the japanese spend so much on
> > infrastructural projects, mostly
> > wasted money, bridges to underpopulated islands and
> > so on is that the
> > construction industry is a major contributor to the
> > liberal democratic party
> > (which is not liberal or democratic or really a
> > party but a coalition of the
> > corrupt in service to the rich and even more
> > powerful.
> > wk tabb
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
> http://shopping.yahoo.com/
>
>
