In , Leontief conducted an empirical test of the H-O theory by applying his In other words, the country resorts to foreign trade in order to economise its. This result has come to be known as the Leontief Paradox. The HO theory generally explains the trade patterns during the post war periods, say РLeontief Paradox: Wassily Leontief: also is known for the “Leontief Paradox. In international trade: Factor endowments: the Heckscher-Ohlin theory.

Author: Mokazahn Nemi
Country: Guinea-Bissau
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Video
Published (Last): 24 March 2016
Pages: 186
PDF File Size: 3.39 Mb
ePub File Size: 10.6 Mb
ISBN: 252-8-92764-259-6
Downloads: 8167
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Kigasar

But still, if H-O theory was correct, intdrnational import-substitutes should be less capital-intensive than its exports. Economics paradoxes International trade theory. A realistic difference in effectiveness between the representative workers in the U.

Leontief Paradox | political economics |

But this should have been relatively insiginficant. Japan even though a labour-abundant country, imported labour-intensive goods like raw materials and exported capital-intensive goods such as automobiles, computers, T. China will export labor services through international trade. Services tend to be nontraded parados.

Leontief Paradox Theory (An Overview)

The transition of the US economy from a wartime to a peacetime economy was not complete until the s. Note that this increased effectiveness of the American workers was not due to a higher capital-labor ratio, because we assume that countries have identical technologies and hence identical capital- labor ratios.

US manufacturing firms outsource fragmented processes to interational wage countries. Internztional that the import-competing industry uses capital and natural resources in fixed proportions, i. In view of this objection, Leontief reworked upon his data after enlarging the group of industries into sectors. A, the major trading partner of Canada, were relatively more capital- intensive than her imports.


The Leontief Paradox to Heckscher-Ohlin Theory | Economics

Salvatore pointed out that the higher labour productivity in the United States than in other countries implies a higher productivity of capital also in that country relative to the other countries. Kwan Choi,”The Leontief Paradox: Brown revealed that the consumption or demand pattern in the United States did not appear to be biased in favour of capital- intensive goods.

He then estimated the capital and labor requirements to produce: If the US imports agricultural products, paraeox an LP internatoinal in the US, because a capital-abundant country is importing the capital-intensive product.

Baldwin also found evidences that trade barriers might explain a significant portion of the Leontief Paradox.

The Leontief Paradox to Heckscher-Ohlin Theory | Economics

Roughly half the countries tested show trade patterns consistent with the HO theory. Obviously, this difference does not explain the Leontief Paradox. The attempts were also made on empirical grounds to reconcile the Leontief analysis with the H-O theory. According to Travis, U. For instance, both the United States and Germany are developed countries with a significant demand for cars, so both have large automotive industries. Travis emphasized that the tariff policies adopted by different trading countries often distorted the pattern and composition of traded commodities.

The writers like B. Thus, FIR is not important empirically, and is not likely to have been responsible for the LP in Leontief had found greater capital-intensity in the U.

Trade theory is supposed to predict the patterns of output trade. In a study, however.

The efficient utilization of capital requires large amounts of natural resources also. China is abundant in labor. Casas and Choi computed the trade pattern that would have prevailed had trade been balanced in In general, leontoef trade is not balanced, a capital-abundant country may not export the capital-intensive goods.


The capital-abundant country United States, on the basis of the above logic, may import capital-intensive goods from abroad, if its income level rises and if the income elasticity of demand for such goods in that country is high. Such models are not compatible with the domestic conditions of international trade in which the technological leontiev do bring about changes in the input-output co-efficients and trade can have significant influence on the composition of production and structure of industries.

In this article we will discuss about: The US seems to have been endowed with more capital per worker than any other country in the world in A study attempted by Tatemato and Ichimura concerning Japan has confirmed the Leontief paradox.

S foreign trade and its factor content. If a country’s labor share is greater than income share, it is abundant in labor. Trefler resurrects Leontief’s theory and has proved that when quality indices of factors are incorporated, US exported capital and imported labor services in HOV Theorem. Masahiro Tatemoto and Shinich Ichimura Explanation: Moroney concluded that FIR has much less empirical importance, albeit theoretically interesting.

Since it was not doubted that the U. That can be one of the reasons for high capital-intensity paaradox their exports, even though they are capital-scarce. Stolper and Roskamp applied Leontief’s method to the trade pattern of East Germany. He refers to the fact that U.