Show simple item record

Essays on Patterns of International Trade.

dc.contributor.authorKamata, Isaoen_US
dc.date.accessioned2009-02-05T19:35:55Z
dc.date.availableNO_RESTRICTIONen_US
dc.date.available2009-02-05T19:35:55Z
dc.date.issued2008en_US
dc.date.submitteden_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/61759
dc.description.abstractThis dissertation studies the roles of comparative advantage, monopolistic competition, and firm-level heterogeneity in international trade. The first essay investigates cross-country and cross-industry variation in the fractions of exporters among domestic firms. The paper presents a model of an economy in which countries are asymmetrically endowed with two production factors, industries vary in the relative intensity of these factors, and firms differ in productivity. The model predicts that the shares of exporting firms in the number of domestic producers are ranked in order of the industry’s relative intensity of the factor with which the country is relatively well-endowed. This quasi-Heckscher-Ohlin prediction is empirically tested using data from the manufacturing censuses of Chile, Colombia, India, and the United States. The result shows that the correlation between the exporter fractions and industry skill intensities is larger for a country with higher skilled-labor abundance, giving evidence of the suggested role of comparative advantage in exporter selection. The second essay examines the importance of factor proportions in explaining the number of product varieties in exports of countries. The introduced model of a two-factor, two-country and multi-industry economy with productivity-heterogeneous firms suggests that countries export more varieties in industries in which the countries have a comparative advantage. This theoretical prediction is confirmed by empirical tests that use disaggregated data on the U.S. imports and show that relatively (un)skilled-labor abundant countries tend to export more varieties in more (un)skilled-labor intensive industries. The third essay proposes an alternative test of the monopolistic competition model of international trade that implies a positive correlation between the volume of trade and the similarity among trading countries in economic size. In contrast to the preceding studies testing this implication for aggregate trade, this paper focuses on trade of differentiated products that the model describes more directly. The amended prediction is tested with disaggregated data on manufacturing trade and production, using various estimation methods. The result confirms the predicted relationship between trade and country size similarity for all country groups, but it also demonstrates that for non-rich countries this correlation is driven more strongly by other forces than by horizontal product differentiation.en_US
dc.format.extent3145562 bytes
dc.format.extent1373 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.subjectInternational Tradeen_US
dc.subjectComparative Advantageen_US
dc.subjectExporter Selectionen_US
dc.subjectExport Varietyen_US
dc.subjectMonopolistic Competitionen_US
dc.subjectFirm Heterogeneityen_US
dc.titleEssays on Patterns of International Trade.en_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.thesisdegreenamePhDen_US
dc.description.thesisdegreedisciplineEconomicsen_US
dc.description.thesisdegreegrantorUniversity of Michigan, Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studiesen_US
dc.contributor.committeememberDeardorff, Alan V.en_US
dc.contributor.committeememberHallak, Juanen_US
dc.contributor.committeememberSivadasan, Jagadeeshen_US
dc.contributor.committeememberStern, Robert M.en_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelEconomicsen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelBusinessen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelSocial Sciencesen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/61759/1/ikamata_1.pdf
dc.owningcollnameDissertations and Theses (Ph.D. and Master's)


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.