Adam Smith and David Ricardo gave economics the theory of International Trade by 1817 (Smith 1776) and what they said remains the basis of the reason economists favour free trade over protection.
The theory says that countries should specialise according to their comparative advantage and as a result overall production will rise and these gains in output will be redistributed through trade (i.e. swapping of goods and services).
To achieve specialisation a country must grow some industries while others shrink (those in which other countries specialise). The result will be more jobs in some industries and less in others.
The loss of jobs is regrettable and is referred to as an 'adjustment cost.' Economists are fully aware of this cost and could explain to those who are now unemployed the overall benefit of the process. It will not be a popular message with the unemployed.
The World Bank is reported to have written a report confirming Smith and Ricardo's conclusions. The growth of free trade (Globalization) has led to overall more jobs, but some have lost out. They estimate 20% of job losses in some areas, like the USA, are due to free trade.
The problem is that there is no guarantee that a country will gain as many jobs through their specialization as they lose. Portugal is a good example. They have lost many jobs to lower cost manufacturing nations (such as Eastern Europe and China), but don't have the comparative advantage in high tech and knowledge based industries they need to replace those jobs.
So the World Bank report is basically saying Smith and Ricardo were right.
No comments:
Post a Comment