发达国家和发展中国家是否在高科技领域展开正面竞争?

L. Edwards, Robert Z. Lawrence
{"title":"发达国家和发展中国家是否在高科技领域展开正面竞争?","authors":"L. Edwards, Robert Z. Lawrence","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1623830","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Concerns that (1) growth in developing countries could worsen the US terms of trade and (2) that increased US trade with developing countries will increase US wage inequality both implicitly reflect the assumption that goods produced in the United States and developing countries are close substitutes and that specialization is incomplete. In this paper we show on the contrary that there are distinctive patterns of international specialization and that developed and developing countries export fundamentally different products, especially those classified as high tech. Judged by export shares, the United States and developing countries specialize in quite different product categories that, for the most part, do not overlap. Moreover, even when exports are classified in the same category, there are large and systematic differences in unit values that suggest the products made by developed and developing countries are not very close substitutes-developed country products are far more sophisticated. This generalization is already recognized in the literature but it does not hold for all types of products. Export unit values of developed and developing countries of primary commodity-intensive products are typically quite similar. Unit values of standardized (low-tech) manufactured products exported by developed and developing countries are somewhat similar. By contrast, the medium- and high-tech manufactured exports of developed and developing countries differ greatly. This finding has important implications. While measures of across product specialization suggest China and other Asian economies have been moving into high-tech exports, the within-product unit value measures indicate they are doing so in the least sophisticated market segments and the gap in unit values between their exports and those of developed countries has not narrowed over time. These findings shed light on the paradoxical finding, exemplified by computers and electronics, that US-manufactured imports from developing countries are concentrated in US industries, which employ relatively high shares of skilled American workers. They help explain why America’s nonoil terms of trade have improved and suggest that recently declining relative import prices from developing countries may not produced significant wage inequality in the United States. Finally they suggest that inferring competitive trends based on trade balances in products classified as \"high tech\" or \"advanced\" can be highly misleading.","PeriodicalId":268548,"journal":{"name":"IRPN: Innovation & Development Economics (Topic)","volume":"519 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"19","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do Developed and Developing Countries Compete Head to Head in High Tech?\",\"authors\":\"L. Edwards, Robert Z. Lawrence\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.1623830\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Concerns that (1) growth in developing countries could worsen the US terms of trade and (2) that increased US trade with developing countries will increase US wage inequality both implicitly reflect the assumption that goods produced in the United States and developing countries are close substitutes and that specialization is incomplete. In this paper we show on the contrary that there are distinctive patterns of international specialization and that developed and developing countries export fundamentally different products, especially those classified as high tech. Judged by export shares, the United States and developing countries specialize in quite different product categories that, for the most part, do not overlap. Moreover, even when exports are classified in the same category, there are large and systematic differences in unit values that suggest the products made by developed and developing countries are not very close substitutes-developed country products are far more sophisticated. This generalization is already recognized in the literature but it does not hold for all types of products. Export unit values of developed and developing countries of primary commodity-intensive products are typically quite similar. Unit values of standardized (low-tech) manufactured products exported by developed and developing countries are somewhat similar. By contrast, the medium- and high-tech manufactured exports of developed and developing countries differ greatly. This finding has important implications. While measures of across product specialization suggest China and other Asian economies have been moving into high-tech exports, the within-product unit value measures indicate they are doing so in the least sophisticated market segments and the gap in unit values between their exports and those of developed countries has not narrowed over time. These findings shed light on the paradoxical finding, exemplified by computers and electronics, that US-manufactured imports from developing countries are concentrated in US industries, which employ relatively high shares of skilled American workers. They help explain why America’s nonoil terms of trade have improved and suggest that recently declining relative import prices from developing countries may not produced significant wage inequality in the United States. Finally they suggest that inferring competitive trends based on trade balances in products classified as \\\"high tech\\\" or \\\"advanced\\\" can be highly misleading.\",\"PeriodicalId\":268548,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"IRPN: Innovation & Development Economics (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"519 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"19\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"IRPN: Innovation & Development Economics (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1623830\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IRPN: Innovation & Development Economics (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1623830","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

摘要

(1)发展中国家的增长可能会恶化美国的贸易条件,(2)美国与发展中国家的贸易增加将加剧美国的工资不平等,这两种担忧都隐含地反映了这样一种假设,即美国和发展中国家生产的商品是紧密替代的,专业化是不完全的。在本文中,我们相反地表明,存在着独特的国际专业化模式,发达国家和发展中国家出口的产品根本不同,特别是那些被归类为高科技的产品。从出口份额来看,美国和发展中国家专门从事的产品类别完全不同,而且在很大程度上并不重叠。此外,即使将出口归为同一类别,单位价值也存在巨大的系统性差异,这表明发达国家和发展中国家生产的产品并不是非常接近的替代品——发达国家的产品要复杂得多。这种概括已经在文献中得到认可,但它并不适用于所有类型的产品。发达国家和发展中国家初级商品密集型产品的出口单位价值通常相当相似。发达国家和发展中国家出口的标准化(低技术)制成品的单位价值有些相似。相比之下,发达国家和发展中国家的中高技术制成品出口差别很大。这一发现具有重要意义。虽然跨产品专业化的衡量指标表明,中国和其他亚洲经济体一直在转向高科技产品的出口,但产品内单位价值的衡量指标表明,它们是在最不复杂的细分市场这样做的,而且它们的出口与发达国家之间的单位价值差距并没有随着时间的推移而缩小。这些发现揭示了一个矛盾的发现,以计算机和电子产品为例,即美国从发展中国家进口的产品集中在美国的工业领域,而这些行业雇佣了相对较高比例的熟练美国工人。它们有助于解释为什么美国的非石油贸易条件有所改善,并表明最近来自发展中国家的相对进口价格下降可能不会在美国造成严重的工资不平等。最后,他们认为,根据被归类为“高科技”或“先进”产品的贸易平衡来推断竞争趋势可能极具误导性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Do Developed and Developing Countries Compete Head to Head in High Tech?
Concerns that (1) growth in developing countries could worsen the US terms of trade and (2) that increased US trade with developing countries will increase US wage inequality both implicitly reflect the assumption that goods produced in the United States and developing countries are close substitutes and that specialization is incomplete. In this paper we show on the contrary that there are distinctive patterns of international specialization and that developed and developing countries export fundamentally different products, especially those classified as high tech. Judged by export shares, the United States and developing countries specialize in quite different product categories that, for the most part, do not overlap. Moreover, even when exports are classified in the same category, there are large and systematic differences in unit values that suggest the products made by developed and developing countries are not very close substitutes-developed country products are far more sophisticated. This generalization is already recognized in the literature but it does not hold for all types of products. Export unit values of developed and developing countries of primary commodity-intensive products are typically quite similar. Unit values of standardized (low-tech) manufactured products exported by developed and developing countries are somewhat similar. By contrast, the medium- and high-tech manufactured exports of developed and developing countries differ greatly. This finding has important implications. While measures of across product specialization suggest China and other Asian economies have been moving into high-tech exports, the within-product unit value measures indicate they are doing so in the least sophisticated market segments and the gap in unit values between their exports and those of developed countries has not narrowed over time. These findings shed light on the paradoxical finding, exemplified by computers and electronics, that US-manufactured imports from developing countries are concentrated in US industries, which employ relatively high shares of skilled American workers. They help explain why America’s nonoil terms of trade have improved and suggest that recently declining relative import prices from developing countries may not produced significant wage inequality in the United States. Finally they suggest that inferring competitive trends based on trade balances in products classified as "high tech" or "advanced" can be highly misleading.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信