How International Trade Works
How International Trade Works
How International Trade Works
A product that is sold to the global market is called an export, and a product
that is bought from the global market is an import. Imports and exports are
accounted for in a country's current account in the balance of payments.
Let's take a simple example. Country A and Country B both produce cotton
sweaters and wine. Country A produces ten sweaters and six bottles of wine a
year while Country B produces six sweaters and ten bottles of wine a year.
Both can produce a total of 16 units. Country A, however, takes three hours to
produce the ten sweaters and two hours to produce the six bottles of wine
(total of five hours). Country B, on the other hand, takes one hour to produce
ten sweaters and three hours to produce six bottles of wine (a total of four
hours).
But these two countries realize that they could produce more by focusing on
those products with which they have a comparative advantage. Country A
then begins to produce only wine, and Country B produces only cotton
sweaters. Each country can now create a specialized output of 20 units per
year and trade equal proportions of both products. As such, each country now
has access to 20 units of both products.
We can see then that for both countries, the opportunity cost of producing
both products is greater than the cost of specializing. More specifically, for
each country, the opportunity cost of producing 16 units of both sweaters and
wine is 20 units of both products (after trading). Specialization reduces their
opportunity cost and therefore maximizes their efficiency in acquiring the
goods they need. With the greater supply, the price of each product would
decrease, thus giving an advantage to the end consumer as well.
Note that, in the example above, Country B could produce both wine and
cotton more efficiently than Country A (less time). This is called an absolute
advantage, and Country B may have it because of a higher level of
technology.
According to the international trade theory, even if a country has an absolute
advantage over another, it can still benefit from specialization.
Origins of Comparative Advantage
The law of comparative advantage is popularly attributed to English political
economist David Ricardo. It's discussed in his book “On the Principles of
Political Economy and Taxation” published in 1817, although it has been
suggested that Ricardo's mentor, James Mill, likely originated the analysis.
David Ricardo famously showed how England and Portugal both benefit by
specializing and trading according to their comparative advantages. In this
case, Portugal was able to make wine at a low cost, while England was able
to cheaply manufacture cloth. Ricardo predicted that each country would
eventually recognize these facts and stop attempting to make the product that
was more costly to generate.
Indeed, as time went on, England stopped producing wine, and Portugal
stopped manufacturing cloth. Both countries saw that it was to their advantage
to stop their efforts at producing these items at home and, instead, to trade
with each other.
Some scholars have recently argued that Ricardo did not actually come up
with comparative advantage. Instead, the idea may have been inserted by his
editor, the political economist and moral philosopher James Mill.
A contemporary example is China’s comparative advantage with the United
States in the form of cheap labor. Chinese workers produce simple consumer
goods at a much lower opportunity cost. The United States’ comparative
advantage is in specialized, capital-intensive labor. American workers produce
sophisticated goods or investment opportunities at lower opportunity costs.
Specializing and trading along these lines benefits each.
Say, for example, the producers of American shoes understand and agree
with the free-trade argument—but they also know that their narrow interests
would be negatively impacted by cheaper foreign shoes. Even if laborers
would be most productive by switching from making shoes to making
computers, nobody in the shoe industry wants to lose his or her job or
see profits decrease in the short run.
This desire could lead the shoemakers to lobby for special tax breaks for their
products and/or extra duties (or even outright bans) on foreign footwear.
Appeals to save American jobs and preserve a time-honored American craft
abound—even though, in the long run, American laborers would be made
relatively less productive and American consumers relatively poorer by such
protectionist tactics.