克鲁格曼 教材《国际经济学》(国际金融)习题答案要点1

Chapter 2

1．Home has 1200 units of labor available. It can produce two goods, apples and bananas. The unit labor requirement in apple production is 3, while in banana production it is 2. a ．Graph out the production possibilities frontier:

b ．What is the opportunity cost of apples in terms of bananas?

5.1=Lb

La a a c ．In the absence of trade, what would the price of apples in terms of bananas be?

In the absence of trade, since labor is the only factor of production and supply decisions are

determined by the attempts of individuals to maximize their earnings in a competitive economy, only when Lb La b a /a a /P P =will both goods be produced. So 1.5 /P P b a =

2．Home is as described in problem 1. There is now also another country, Foreign, with a

labor force of 800. Foreign ’s unit labor requirement in apple production is 5, while in banana production it is 1.

a ．Graph Foreign ’s production possibilities frontier:

b ．Construct the world relative supply curve.

Home's PPF 0200400600800

200400600800Q apple Q banana Foreign's PPF

02004006008001000

80160240320400Q*apple Q*banana

3．Now suppose world relative demand takes the following form: Demand for apples/demand

for bananas = price of bananas/price of apples.

a ．Graph the relative demand curve along with the relative supply curve:

a b b a /P P /D D =

∵When the market achieves its equilibrium, we have

1b a )(D D -**=++=b

a b b a a P P Q Q Q Q ∴RD is a hyperbola x

y 1=

b ．What is the equilibrium relative price of apples?

The equilibrium relative price of apples is determined by the intersection of the RD and RS

curves.

RD: y

x 1= RS: 5]5,5.1[5

.1],5.0(5.0)5.0,0[=∈=??

???+∞∈=∈y y y x x x

∴25.0==y x

∴2/=b P a P e e

c ．Describe the pattern of trade.

∵b a

b e

a e

b a P P P P P P ///>>**

∴In this two-country world, Home will specialize in the apple production, export apples

and import bananas. Foreign will specialize in the banana production, export bananas and import apples.

d ．Show that both Hom

e and Foreign gain from trade.

International trade allows Home and Foreign to consume anywhere within the colored

lines, which lie outside the countries ’ production possibility frontiers. And the indirect method, specializing in producing only one production then trade with other country, is a more efficient method than direct production. In the absence of trade, Home could gain three bananas by foregoing two apples, and Foreign could gain by one foregoing five bananas. Trade allows each country to trade two bananas for one apple. Home could then gain four bananas by foregoing two apples while Foreign could gain one apple by foregoing only two bananas. So both Home and Foreign gain from trade.

4．Suppose that instead of 1200 workers, Home had 2400. Find the equilibrium relative price. What can you say about the efficiency of world production and the division of the gains from trade between Home and Foreign in this case?

RD: y

x 1= RS: 5]5,5.1[5

.1],1(1)1,0[=∈=??

???+∞∈=∈y y y x x x

∴5.132==

y x ∴5.1/=b P a P e e

In this case, Foreign will specialize in the banana production, export bananas and import apples. But Home will produce bananas and apples at the same time. And the opportunity cost of bananas in terms of apples for Home remains the same. So Home neither gains nor loses but Foreign gains from trade.

5．Suppose that Home has 2400 workers, but they are only half as production in both industries as we have been assuming, Construct the world relative supply curve and determine the equilibrium relative price. How do the gains from trade compare with those in the case described in problem 4?

In this case, the labor is doubled while the productivity of labor is halved, so the ＂effective labor＂remains the same. So the answer is similar to that in 3. And both Home and Foreign can gain from trade. But Foreign gains lesser compare with that in the case 4.

6．”Korean workers earn only $2.50 an hour; if we allow Korea to export as much as it likes to the United States, our workers will be forced down to the same level. Y ou can’t import a $5 shirt without importing the $2.50 wage that goes with it.” Discuss.

In fact, relative wage rate is determined by comparative productivity and the relative demand for goods. Korea’s low wage reflects the fact that Korea is less productive than the United States in most industries. Actually, trade with a less productive, low wage country can raise the welfare and standard of living of countries with high productivity, such as United States. So

this pauper labor argument is wrong.

7．Japanese labor productivity is roughly the same as that of the United States in the manufacturing sector (higher in some industries, lower in others), while the United States, is still considerably more productive in the service sector. But most services are non-traded. Some analysts have argued that this poses a problem for the United States, because our comparative advantage lies in things we cannot sell on world markets. What is wrong with this argument?

The competitive advantage of any industry depends on both the relative productivities of the industries and the relative wages across industries. So there are four aspects should be taken into account before we reach conclusion: both the industries and service sectors of Japan and U.S., not just the two service sectors. So this statement does not bade on the reasonable logic. 8．Anyone who has visited Japan knows it is an incredibly expensive place; although Japanese workers earn about the same as their U.S. counterparts, the purchasing power of their incomes is about one-third less. Extend your discussing from question 7 to explain this observation. (Hint: Think about wages and the implied prices of non-trade goods.) The relative higher purchasing power of U.S. is sustained and maintained by its considerably higher productivity in services. Because most of those services are non-traded, Japanese could not benefit from those lower service costs. And U.S. does not have to face a lower international price of services. So the purchasing power of Japanese is just one-third of their U.S. counterparts.

9．How does the fact that many goods are non-traded affect the extent of possible gains from trade?

Actually the gains from trade depended on the proportion of non-traded goods. The gains will increase as the proportion of non-traded goods decrease.

10．We have focused on the case of trade involving only two countries. Suppose that there are many countries capable of producing two goods, and that each country has only one factor of production, labor. What could we say about the pattern of production and in this case? (Hint: Try constructing the world relative supply curve.)

Any countries to the left of the intersection of the relative demand and relative supply curves export the good in which they have a comparative advantage relative to any country to the right of the intersection. If the intersection occurs in a horizontal portion then the country with that price ratio produces both goods.

Chapter 3

1. In 1986, the price of oil on world markets dropped sharply. Since the United States is an

oil-importing country, this was widely regarded as good for the U.S. economy. Yet in Texas and Louisiana 1986 was a year of economic decline. Why?

It can deduce that Texas and Louisiana are oil-producing states of United States. So when the price of oil on world markets declined, the real wage of this industry fell in terms of other goods. This might be the reason of economic decline in these two states in 1986.

2。An economy can produce good 1 using labor and capital and good 2 using labor and land. The total supply of labor is 100 units. Given the supply of capital, the outputs of the two goods depends on labor input as follows:

To analyze the economy ’s production possibility frontier, consider how the output mix

changes as labor is shifted between the two sectors.

a. Graph the production functions for good 1 and good 2.

),()

,(22221111L K Q Q L K Q Q ==

Production Function for Good 10

25.138.148.657.56673.680.787.493.9100010203040506070

8090

1000102030405060708090100Labor Input for Good 1Output Production Function for Good 239.852.561.869.375.881.586.7

91.495.51002030405060708090

100

Output

b. Graph the production possibility frontier. Why is it curved?

The PPF is curved due to declining marginal product of labor in each good. The total labor

supply is fixed. So as L 1 rises, MPL 1 falls; correspondingly, as L 2 falls, MPL 2 rises. So PP gets steeper as we move down it to the right.

2. The marginal product of labor curves corresponding to the production functions in

problem2 are as follows:

a. Suppose that the price of good 2 relative to that of good 1 is 2. Determine

graphically the wage rate and the allocation of labor between the two sectors.

With the assumption that labor is freely mobile between sectors, it will move from the

low-wage sector to the high-wage sector until wages are equalized. So in equilibrium, the

wage rate is equal to the value of labor ’s marginal product.

2/122211=?=?P P P MPL P MPL

Q 1

Q 2

L 1 L 2 PPF ),(2222L K Q Q =),(1111L K Q Q =100100

The abscissa of point of intersection illustrated above should be between (20, 30). Since

we only have to find out the approximate answer, linear function could be employed.

The labor allocation between the sectors is approximately L 1=27 and L 2=73. The wage

rate is approximately 0.98.

b. Using the graph drawn for problem 2, determine the output of each sector. Then

confirm graphically that the slop of the production possibility frontier at that point

equals the relative price.

The relative price is P 2/P 1=2 and we have got the approximate labor allocation, so we can

employ the linear function again to calculate the approximate output of each sector:

Q 1=44 and Q 2=90.

c. Suppose that the relative price of good 2 falls to 1. Repeat (a) and (b).

Q 1 Q 2

L 1 L 2

PPF

),(2222L K Q Q =),(1111L K Q Q =1001002

1

-=slope

The relative decline in the price of good 2 caused labor to be reallocated: labor is drawn out of production of good 2 and enters production of good 1 (Ｌ1=62, L 2=38). This also leads to an output adjustment, that is, production of good 2 falls to 68 units and production of good 1 rises to 76 units. And the wage rate is approximately equal to 0.74.

d. Calculate the effects of the price change on the income of the specific factors in

sectors 1 and 2.

With the relative price change from P 2/P 1=2 to P 2/P 1=1, the price of good 2 has fallen by

50 percent, while the price of good 1 has stayed the same. Wages have fallen too, but by

less than the fall in P 2 (wages fell approximately 25 percent). Thus, the real wage relative

to P 2 actually rises while real wage relative to P 1 falls. Hence, to determine the welfare

consequence for workers, the information about their consumption shares of good 1 and

good 2 is needed.

3. In the text we examined the impacts of increases in the supply of capital and land. But

what if the mobile factor, labor, increases in supply?

Q 1 Q 2

L 1 L 2

PPF

),(2222L K Q Q =),(1111L K Q Q =1001001

-=slope 2

1

-=slope

a ． Analyze the qualitative effects of an increase in the supply of labor in the specific

factors model, holding the price of both goods constant.

For an economy producing two goods, X an Y, with labor demands reflected by their marginal revenue product curves, there is an initial wage of w 1 and an initial labor allocation of L x =O x A and L y =O y A. When the supply of labor increases, the right boundary of the diagram illustrated below pushed out to O y ’. The demand for labor in sector Y is pulled rightward with the boundary. The new intersection of the labor demand curves shows that labor expands in both sectors, and therefore output of both X and Y also expand. The relative expansion of output is ambiguous. Wages paid to workers fall.

b ． Graph the effect on the equilibrium for the numerical example in problems 2 and 3,

given a relative price of 1, when the labor force expands from 100 to 140.

With the law of diminishing returns, the new production possibility frontier is more concave and steeper (flatter) at the ends when total labor supply increases.

L 1 increase to 90 from 62 and L 2 increases to 50 from 38. Wages decline from 0.74 to 0.60. This new allocation of labor leads to a new output mix of approximately Q 1=85 and Q 2=77. W

x x P MPL ?y

y P MPL ?1

w 2

w y O '

y O A B

Chapter 4

1． In the United States where land is cheap, the ratio of land to labor used in cattle rising is

higher than that of land used in wheat growing. But in more crowded countries, where land is expensive and labor is cheap, it is common to raise cows by using less land and more labor than Americans use to grow wheat. Can we still say that raising cattle is land intensive compared with farming wheat? Why or why not?

The definition of cattle growing as land intensive depends on the ratio of land to labor used in

production, not on the ratio of land or labor to output. The ratio of land to labor in cattle exceeds the ratio in wheat in the United States, implying cattle is land intensive in the United States. Cattle is land intensive in other countries too if the ratio of land to labor in cattle production exceeds the ratio in wheat production in that country. The comparison between another country and the United States is less relevant for answering the question.

2． Suppose that at current factor prices cloth is produced using 20 hours of labor for each

acre of land, and food is produced using only 5 hours of labor per acre of land.

a. Suppose that the economy ’s total resources are 600 hours of labor and 60 acres of

land. Using a diagram determine the allocation of resources.

5T F LF /TF LF /QF)(TF / /QF)(LF aTF / aLF 20TC LC /TC LC /QC)(TC / /QC)(LC aTC / aLC =?===?==

We can solve this algebraically since L=LC+LF=600 and T=TC+TF=60. The solution is LC=400, TC=20, LF=200 and TF=40. Q 1 Q 2

L 1 L 2

PPF

),(2222L K Q Q =),(1111L K Q Q =140140100

100

b. Now suppose that the labor supply increase first to 800, then 1000, then 1200 hours.

Using a diagram like Figure4-6, trace out the changing allocation of resources.

t o n ).s p e c i a l i z a (c o m p l

e t e 0.LF 0,TF 1200,LC 60,TC :1200L 66.67LF 13.33,TF 933.33,LC 46.67,TC :1000L 133.33LF 26.67,TF 666.67,LC 33.33,TC :800L ===============

c. What would happen if the labor supply were to increase even further?

At constant factor prices, some labor would be unused, so factor prices would have to

change, or there would be unemployment.

3. “The world ’s poorest countries cannot find anything to export. There is no resource that

is abundant — certainly not capital or land, and in small poor nations not even labor is Labor Land Cloth

Food 0l 800 0l 1000 0l 1200 Labor Land Cloth

Food

LC LF TC

TF

abundant.” Discuss.

The gains from trade depend on comparative rather than absolute advantage. As to poor countries, what matters is not the absolute abundance of factors, but their relative abundance.

Poor countries have an abundance of labor relative to capital when compared to more developed countries.

4.The U.S. labor movement — which mostly represents blue-collar workers rather than

professionals and highly educated workers —has traditionally favored limits on imports form less-affluent countries. Is this a shortsighted policy of a rational one in view of the interests of union members? How does the answer depend on the model of trade?

In the Ricardo’s model, labor gains from trade through an increase in its purchasing power.

This result does not support labor union demands for limits on imports from less affluent countries.

In the Immobile Factors model labor may gain or lose from trade. Purchasing power in terms of one good will rise, but in terms of the other good it will decline.

The Heckscher-Ohlin model directly discusses distribution by considering the effects of trade on the owners of factors of production. In the context of this model, unskilled U.S. labor loses from trade since this group represents the relatively scarce factors in this country. The results from the Heckscher-Ohlin model support labor union demands for import limits.

5.There is substantial inequality of wage levels between regions within the United States.

For example, wages of manufacturing workers in equivalent jobs are about 20 percent lower in the Southeast than they are in the Far West. Which of the explanations of failure of factor price equalization might account for this? How is this case different from the divergence of wages between the United States and Mexico (which is geographically closer to both the U.S. Southeast and the Far West than the Southeast and Far West are to each other)?

When we employ factor price equalization, we should pay attention to its conditions: both countries/regions produce both goods; both countries have the same technology of production, and the absence of barriers to trade. Inequality of wage levels between regions within the United States may caused by some or all of these reasons.

Actually, the barriers to trade always exist in the real world due to transportation costs. And the trade between U.S. and Mexico, by contrast, is subject to legal limits; together with cultural differences that inhibit the flow of technology, this may explain why the difference in wage rates is so much larger.

6.Explain why the Leontief paradox and the more recent Bowen, Leamer, and

Sveikauskas results reported in the text contradict the factor-proportions theory.

The factor proportions theory states that countries export those goods whose production is intensive in factors with which they are abundantly endowed. One would expect the United States, which has a high capital/labor ratio relative to the rest of the world, to export capital-intensive goods if the Heckscher-Ohlin theory holds. Leontief found that the United States exported labor-intensive goods. Bowen, Leamer and Sveikauskas found that the correlation between factor endowment and trade patterns is weak for the world as a whole.

The data do not support the predictions of the theory that countries' exports and imports reflect the relative endowments of factors.

7.In the discussion of empirical results on the Heckscher-Ohlin model, we noted that

recent work suggests that the efficiency of factors of production seems to differ internationally. Explain how this would affect the concept of factor price equalization.

If the efficiency of the factors of production differs internationally, the lessons of the Heckscher-Ohlin theory would be applied to “effective factors” which adjust for the differences in technology or worker skills or land quality (for example). The adjusted model has been found to be more successful than the unadjusted model at explaining the pattern of trade between countries. Factor-price equalization concepts would apply to the effective factors. A worker with more skills or in a country with better technology could be considered to be equal to two workers in another country. Thus, the single person would be two effective units of labor. Thus, the one high-skilled worker could earn twice what lower skilled workers do and the price of one effective unit of labor would still be equalized.

Chapter 6

1.For each of the following examples, explain whether this is a case of external or internal

economies of scale:

a.Most musical wind instruments in the United States are produced by more than a

dozen factories in Elkhart, Indiana.

b.All Hondas sold in the United States are either imported or produced in Marysville,

Ohio.

c.All airframes for Airbus, Europe’s only producer of large aircraft, are assembled in

Toulouse, France.

d.Hartford, Connecticut is the insurance capital of the northeastern United States.

External economies of scale: Cases a and d. The productions of these two industries concentrate in a few locations and successfully reduce each industry's costs even when the scale of operation of individual firms remains small. External economies need not lead to imperfect competition. The benefits of geographical concentration may include a greater variety of specialized services to support industry operations and larger labor markets or thicker input markets.

Internal economies of scale: Cases b and c. Both of them occur at the level of the individual firm. The larger the output of a product by a particular firm, the lower its average costs. This leads to imperfect competition as in petrochemicals, aircraft, and autos.

2.In perfect competition, firm set price equal to marginal cost. Why isn’t this possible

when there are internal economies of scale?

Unlike the case of perfectly competitive markets, under monopoly marginal revenue is not equal to price. The profit maximizing output level of a monopolist occurs where marginal revenue equals marginal cost. Marginal revenue is always less than price under imperfectly competitive markets because to sell an extra unit of output the firm must lower the price of all units, not just the marginal one.

3.It is often argued that the existence of increasing returns is a source of conflict between

countries, since each country is better off if it can increase its production in those industries characterized by economies of scale. Evaluate this view in terms of both the monopolistic competition and the external economy models.

Both internal economies of scale (which may lead to monopolistic competition) and external

economies of scale could lead to increasing returns.

By concentrating the production of each good with economies of scale in one country rather

than spreading the production over several countries, the world economy will use the same amount of labor to produce more output.

In the monopolistic competition model, the concentration of labor benefits the host country. The host country can capture some monopoly rents. But the rest of the world may hurt and have to face higher prices on its consumption goods.

In the external economies case, such monopolistic pricing behavior is less likely since imperfectly competitive markets are less likely.

4. Suppose the two countries we considered in the numerical example on pages 132-135

were to integrate their automobile marker with a third country with an annual market for 3.75 million automobiles. Find the number of firms, the output per firm, and the price per automobile in the new integrated market after trade.

15.8n X 1c P c AC 2=?==??→?+=+==n S Fb S n bn X F AC P

However, since you will never see 0.8 firms, there will be 15 firms that enter the market, not

16 firms since the last firm knows that it can not make positive profits. The rest of the solution is straight-forward. Using X=S/n, output per firm is 41,666 units. Using the price equation, and the fact that c=5,000, yields an equilibrium price of $7,000.

5. Evaluate the relative importance of economies of scale and comparative advantage in

causing the following:

a. Most of the world ’s aluminum is smelted in Norway or Canada.

b. Half of the world ’s large jet aircraft are assembled in Seattle.

c. Most semiconductors are manufactured in either the United States or Japan.

d. Most Scotch whiskey comes from Scotland.

e. Much of the world ’s best wine comes from France.

a. The relatively few locations for production suggest external economies of scale in

production. If these operations are large, there may also be large internal economies of scale in production.

b. Since economies of scale are significant in airplane production, it tends to be done by a

small number of (imperfectly competitive) firms at a limited number of locations. One such location is Seattle, where Boeing produces.

c. Since external economies of scale are significant in semiconductor production,

semiconductor industries tend to be concentrated in certain geographic locations. If, for some historical reason, a semiconductor is established in a specific location, the export of semiconductors by that country is due to economies of scale and not comparative advantage.

d. "True" scotch whiskey can only come from Scotland. The production of scotch whiskey

requires a technique known to skilled distillers who are concentrated in the region. Also,

soil and climactic conditions are favorable for grains used in local scotch production. This reflects comparative advantage.

e. France has a particular blend of climactic conditions and land that is difficult to reproduce elsewhere. This generates a comparative advantage in wine production.

6. There are some shops in Japan that sell Japanese goods imported back from the United

States at a discount over the prices charged by other Japanese shops. How is this possible?

The Japanese producers employ price discrimination across United States and Japanese

markets, so that the goods sold in the United States are much cheaper than those sold in Japan. It may be profitable for other Japanese to purchase these goods in the United States, incur any tariffs and transportation costs, and resell the goods in Japan. Clearly, the price differential across markets may lead to such profitable chance.

7. Consider a situation similar to that in Figure 6-9, in which two countries that can

produce a good are subject to forward-falling supply curves. In this case, however, suppose that the two countries have the same costs, so that their supply curves are identical.

a. What would you expect to be the pattern of international specialization and trade?

What would determine who produces the good?

Suppose two countries that can produce a good are subject to forward-falling supply curves and are identical countries with identical curves. If one country starts out as a producer of a good, i.e. it has a head start even as a matter of historical accident, then all production will occur in that particular country and it will export to the rest of the world.

b. What are the benefits of international trade in this case? Do they accrue only to the

country that gets the industry?

Consumers in both countries will pay a lower price for this good when external

economies are maximized through trade and all production is located in a single market. In the present example, no single country has a natural cost advantage or is worse off than it would be under autarky.

8. It is fairly common for an industrial cluster to break up and for production to move to

locations with lower wages when the technology of the industry is no longer rapidly improving —when it is no longer essential to have the absolutely most modern machinery, when the need for highly skilled workers has declined, and when being at the cutting edge of innovation conveys only a small advantage. Explain this tendency of industrial clusters to break up in terms of the theory of external economies.

Q P,C

D AC AC External Economics and Specialization

Q P,C D

AC

AC External Economics and Specialization

External economies are important for firms as technology changes rapidly and as the “cutting edge” moves quickly with frequent innovations. As this process slows, manufacturing becomes more normal and standard and there is less advantage brought by external economies. Instead, firms look for low cost production locations. Since external economies are no longer important, firms find little advantage in being clustered and it is likely that low-wage locations will be chosen.

CHAPTER7

1. The marginal product of labor in Home is 10 and in Foreign is 18. Wages are higher in Foreign, so workers migrate there to the point where the marginal product in both Home and Foreign is equated. This occurs when there are 7 workers in each country, and the marginal product of labor in each country is 14.

2. There is no incentive to migrate when there is factor price equalization. This occurs when both countries produce both goods and when there are no barriers to trade (the problem assumes technology is the same in the two countries). A tariff by country A increases the relative price of the protected good in that country and lowers its relative price in the country B. If the protected good uses labor relatively intensively, the demand for labor in country A rises, as does the return to labor, and the return to labor in the country B falls. These results follow from the Stolper-Samuelson theory, which states that an increase in the price of a good raises the return to the factor used intensively in the production of that good by more than the price increase. These international wage differentials induce migration from country B to country A.

3. The analysis of intertemporal trade follows directly the analysis of trade of two goods. Substitute "future consumption" and "present consumption" for "cloth" and "food." The relevant relative price is the cost of future consumption compared to present consumption, which is the inverse of the real interest rate. Countries in which present consumption is relatively cheap (which have low real interest rates) will "export" present consumption (i.e. lend) to countries in which present consumption is relatively dear (which have high real interest rates). The equilibrium real interest rate after borrowing and lending occur lies between that found in each country before borrowing and lending take place. Gains from borrowing and lending are analogous to gains from trade--there is greater efficiency in the production of goods intertemporally.

4. Foregoing current consumption allows one to obtain future consumption. There will be a bias towards future consumption if the amount of future consumption which can be obtained by foregoing current consumption is high. In terms of the analysis presented in this chapter, there is a bias towards future consumption if the real interest rate in the economy is higher in the absence of international borrowing or lending than the world real interest rate.

a. The large inflows of immigrants means that the marginal product of capital will rise as more workers enter the country. The real interest rate will be high, and there will be a bias towards future consumption.

b. The marginal product of capital is low and thus there is a bias towards current consumption.

c. The direction of the bias depends upon the comparison of the increase in the price of oil and the world real interest rate. Leaving the oil in the ground provides a return of the increase in the price of oil whereas the world real interest rate may be higher or lower than this increase.

d. Foregoing current consumption allows exploitation of resources, and higher future consumption. Thus, there is a bias towards future consumption.

e. The return to capital is higher than in the rest of the world (since the country's rate of growth exceeds that of the rest of the world), and there is a bias toward future consumption.

5. a. $10 million is not a controlling interest in IBM, so this does not qualify as direct foreign investment. It is international portfolio diversification.

b. This is direct foreign investment if one considers the apartment building a business which pays returns in terms of rents.

c. Unless particular U.S. shareholders will not have control over the new French company,

this will not be direct foreign investment.

d. This is not direct foreign investment since the Italian company is an "employee," but not

the ones which ultimately control, the company.

6. In terms of location, the Karma company has avoided Brazilian import restrictions. In terms of internalization, the firm has retained its control over the technology by not divulging its patents.

chapter 8

1. The import demand equation, MD , is found by subtracting the home supply equation from the home demand equation. This results in MD = 80 - 40 x P. Without trade, domestic prices and quantities adjust such that import demand is zero. Thus, the price in the absence of trade is

2.

2. a. Foreign's export supply curve, XS , is XS = -40 + 40 x P. In the absence of trade, the price is 1.

b. When trade occurs export supply is equal to import demand, XS = MD . Thus, using the

equations from problems 1 and 2a, P = 1.50, and the volume of trade is 20.

3. a. The new MD curve is 80 - 40 x (P+t) where t is the specific tariff rate, equal to 0.5. (Note: in solving these problems you should be careful about whether a specific tariff or ad valorem tariff is imposed. With an ad valorem tariff, the MD equation would be expressed as MD =80-40 x (1+t)P). The equation for the export supply curve by the foreign country is unchanged. Solving, we find that the world price is $1.25, and thus the internal price at home is $1.75. The volume of trade has been reduced to 10, and the total demand for wheat at home has fallen to 65 (from the free trade level of 70). The total demand for wheat in Foreign has gone up from 50 to 55.

b. and

c. The welfare of the home country is best studied using the combined numerical and

graphical solutions presented below in Figure 8-1. Home Supply

Home Demand

a b c d e P T =1.75

50556070Quantity

Price P W =1.50

P T*=1.25

where the areas in the figure are:

a: 55(1.75-1.50) -.5(55-50)(1.75-1.50)=13.125

b: .5(55-50)(1.75-1.50)=0.625

c: (65-55)(1.75-1.50)=2.50

d: .5(70-65)(1.75-1.50)=0.625

e: (65-55)(1.50-1.25)=2.50

Consumer surplus change: -(a+b+c+d)=-16.875. Producer surplus change: a=13.125. Government revenue change: c+e=5. Efficiency losses b+d are exceeded by terms of trade gain e. [Note: in the calculations for the a, b, and d areas a figure of .5 shows up. This is because we are measuring the area of a triangle, which is one-half of the area of the rectangle defined by the product of the horizontal and vertical sides.]

4. Using the same solution methodology as in problem 3, when the home country is very small relative to the foreign country, its effects on the terms of trade are expected to be much less. The small country is much more likely to be hurt by its imposition of a tariff. Indeed, this intuition is shown in this problem. The free trade equilibrium is now at the price $1.09 and the trade volume is now $36.40.

With the imposition of a tariff of 0.5 by Home, the new world price is $1.045, the internal home price is $1.545, home demand is 69.10 units, home supply is 50.90 and the volume of trade is 18.20. When Home is relatively small, the effect of a tariff on world price is smaller than when Home is relatively large. When Foreign and Home were closer in size, a tariff of .5 by home lowered world price by 25 percent, whereas in this case the same tariff lowers world price by about 5 percent. The internal Home price is now closer to the free trade price plus t than when Home was relatively large. In this case, the government revenues from the tariff equal 9.10, the consumer surplus loss is 33.51, and the producer surplus gain is 21.089. The distortionary losses associated with the tariff (areas b+d) sum to 4.14 and the terms of trade gain (e) is 0.819. Clearly, in this small country example the distortionary losses from the tariff swamp the terms of trade gains. The general lesson is the smaller the economy, the larger the losses from a tariff since the terms of trade gains are smaller.

5. The effective rate of protection takes into consideration the costs of imported intermediate goods. In this example, half of the cost of an aircraft represents components purchased from other countries. Without the subsidy the aircraft would cost $60 million. The European value added to the aircraft is $30 million. The subsidy cuts the cost of the value added to purchasers of the airplane to $20 million. Thus, the effective rate of protection is (30 - 20)/20 = 50%.

6. We first use the foreign export supply and domestic import demand curves to determine the new world price. The foreign supply of exports curve, with a foreign subsidy of 50 percent per unit, becomes XS= -40 + 40(1+0.5) x P. The equilibrium world price is 1.2 and the internal foreign price is 1.8. The volume of trade is 32. The foreign demand and supply curves are used to determine the costs and benefits of the subsidy. Construct a diagram similar to that in the text and calculate the area of the various polygons. The government must provide (1.8 - 1.2) x 32 = 19.2 units of output to support the subsidy. Foreign producers surplus rises due to the subsidy by the amount of 15.3 units of output. Foreign consumers surplus falls due to the higher price by

7.5 units of the good. Thus, the net loss to Foreign due to the subsidy is 7.5 + 19.2 - 15.3 = 11.4 units of output. Home consumers and producers face an internal price of 1.2 as a result of the subsidy. Home consumers surplus rises by 70 x .3 + .5 (6x.3) = 21.9 while Home producers

surplus falls by 44 x .3 + .5(6 x .3) = 14.1, for a net gain of 7.8 units of output.

7. At a price of $10 per bag of peanuts, Acirema imports 200 bags of peanuts. A quota limiting the import of peanuts to 50 bags has the following effects:

a. The price of peanuts rises to $20 per bag.

b. The quota rents are ($20 - $10) x 50 = $500.

c. The consumption distortion loss is .5 x 100 bags x $10 per bag = $500.

d. The production distortion loss is .5 x50 bags x$10 per bag = $250.

Chapter 9

1. The arguments for free trade in this quote include:

?Free trade allows consumers and producers to make decisions based upon the marginal cost and benefits associated with a good when costs and prices are undistorted by government policy.

?The Philippines is "small," so it will have little scope for influencing world prices and capturing welfare gains through an improvement of its terms of trade.

?"Escaping the confines of a narrow domestic market" allows possible gains through economies of scale in production.

?Free trade "opens new horizons for entrepreneurship."

?Special interests may dictate trade policy for their own ends rather than for the general welfare. Free trade policies may aid in halting corruption where these special interests exert undue or disproportionate influence on public policy.

2. a. This is potentially a valid argument for a tariff, since it is based on an assumed ability of the United States to affect world prices -- that is, it is a version of the optimal tariff argument. If the United States is concerned about higher world prices in the future, it could use policies which encourage the accumulation of oil inventories and minimize the potential for future adverse shocks.

b. Sharply falling prices benefit U.S. consumers, and since these are off-season grapes and do

not compete with the supplies from U.S. producers, the domestic producers are not hurt.

There is no reason to keep a luxury good expensive.

c. The higher income of farmers due to export subsidies and the potentially higher income to

those who sell goods and services to the farmers comes at the expense of consumers and taxpayers. Unless there is some domestic market failure, an export subsidy always produces more costs than benefits. Indeed, if the goal of policy is to stimulate the demand for the associated goods and services, policies should be targeted directly at these goals.

d. There may be external economies associated with the domestic production of

semiconductors. This is a potentially a valid argument. But the gains to producers of protecting the semiconductor industry must as always be weighed against the higher costs to consumers and other industries which pervasively use the chips. A well-targeted policy instrument would be a production subsidy. This has the advantage of directly dealing with the externalities associated with domestic chip production.

e. Thousands of homebuyers as consumers (as well as workers who build the homes for

which the timber was bought) have benefited from the cheaper imported timber. If the goal of policy is to soften the blow to timber workers, a more efficient policy would be direct payments to timber workers in order to aid their relocation.