Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T03:58:23.861Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

POVERTY TRAPS AND INFERIOR GOODS IN A DYNAMIC HECKSCHER–OHLIN MODEL

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 May 2012

Eric W. Bond ,
Kazumichi Iwasa  and
Kazuo Nishimura
Eric W. Bond
Affiliation:
Vanderbilt University
Kazumichi Iwasa
Affiliation:
KIER, Kyoto University
Kazuo Nishimura*
Affiliation:
KIER, Kyoto University
*
Address correspondence to: Kazuo Nishimura, KIER, Kyoto University, Yoshida-Honmachi, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan; e-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We extend the dynamic Heckscher–Ohlin model in Bond et al. [Economic Theory (48, 171–204, 2011)] and show that if the labor-intensive good is inferior, then there may exist multiple steady states in autarky and poverty traps can arise. Poverty traps for the world economy, in the form of Pareto-dominated steady states, are also shown to exist. We show that the opening of trade can have the effect of pulling the initially poorer country out of a poverty trap, with both countries having steady state capital stocks exceeding the autarky level. However, trade can also pull an initially richer country into a poverty trap. These possibilities are a sharp contrast with dynamic Heckscher–Ohlin models with normality in consumption, where the country with the larger (smaller) capital stock than the other will reach a steady state where the level of welfare is higher (lower) than in the autarkic steady state.

Keywords

Dynamic Heckscher–Ohlin ModelPoverty TrapsInferior Goods
Type
Articles
Information
Macroeconomic Dynamics , Volume 17 , Special Issue 6: Equality, Public Insurance, and Monetary Policy , September 2013 , pp. 1227 - 1251
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Atkeson, Andrew and Kehoe, Patrick J. (2000) Paths of Development for Early- and Late-Boomers in a Dynamic Heckscher–Ohlin Model. Research Staff Report 256, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Azariadis, Costas (1996) The economics of poverty traps: Part one. Complete markets. Journal of Economic Growth 1, 449–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bond, Eric W., Iwasa, Kazumichi, and Nishimura, Kazuo (2011) A dynamic two country Heckscher–Ohlin model with non-homothetic preferences. Economic Theory 48, 171–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, Zhiqi (1992) Long-run equilibria in a dynamic Heckscher–Ohlin model. Canadian Journal of Economics 25, 923–943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doi, Junko, Iwasa, Kazumichi, and Shimomura, Koji (2007) Indeterminacy in the free-trade world. Journal of Difference Equations and Applications 13, 135–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doi, Junko, Iwasa, Kazumichi, and Shimomura, Koji (2009) Giffen behavior independent of the wealth level. Economic Theory 41, 247–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, Robert T. and Miller, Nolan H. (2008) Giffen behavior and subsistence consumption. American Economic Review 98, 1553–1577.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kurz, Mordecai (1968) Optimal economic growth and wealth effects. International Economic Review 9, 348–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matsuyama, Kiminori (2008) Poverty traps. In Durlauf, Steven N. and Blume, Lawrence E. (eds.), The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics (2nd ed.), Vol. 6, pp. 561–565. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Nishimura, Kazuo and Shimomura, Koji (2002) Trade and indeterminacy in a dynamic general equilibrium model. Journal of Economic Theory 105, 244–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nishimura, Kazuo and Shimomura, Koji (2006) Indeterminacy in a dynamic two-country model. Economic Theory 29, 307–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ventura, Jaume (1997) Growth and interdependence. Quarterly Journal of Economics 112, 57–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar