Suchergebnisse

One—Introduction -- 1. Classicists and Critics -- 2. Neoclassical Trade Models -- 3. Recent Work on Economic Growth -- Two—The Single Country Model -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Neoclassical Production -- 3. Demand -- 4. Short-Run Equilibrium -- 5. Long-Run Equilibrium -- 6. Comparative Dynamics in the Closed Model -- Three—A Model of the Terms of Trade and Economic Growth -- 1. A Model of Trading Economies -- 2. The Reciprocal Demand Function and Short-Run Equilibrium in an Open Economy -- 3. Comparative Statics Analysis -- 4. Patterns of Incomplete Specialization and Capital Accumulation -- 5. Complete Specialization -- 6. Long-Run Dynamic Problems -- 7. A Model of the Terms of Trade Assuming Agriculture is More Capital-intensive than Manufactures -- 8. The Case of Factor Intensity Reversal -- Four—The Small Country in a Large World -- 1. A Small Country Trading at World Prices -- 2. Countries with Different Natural Rates of Growth -- Five—Summary and Conclusions -- 1. A Summary of the Closed Model -- 2. A Summary of the Open Model.

Enthält Rezensionen u.a. von: Berry, R. Albert ; Soligo, Ronald: Economic policy and income distribution in Colombia. - Boulder/Colo. : Westview Press, 1980, 269 S

The paper updates to 1980 the estimates of the Harberger inflation model for Argentine, Brazil, Chile, Colombia and Uruguay and shows that the reaction to monetary growth is fairly rapid. An aggregate supply function including imported inputs is hypothesized, following recent theoretical work. The results explain the similar outcomes of many of the previous estimates of the Harberger inflation equation, which included the rate of devaluation in an ad hoc fashion

Professor Currie's Comment not only strengthens his already well‐known leading sector strategy of development; it also raises some further interesting questions regarding the behavior of suppliers in Latin America which are crucial to the choice of policy for development. While the definitive answers to these questions probably lie beyond our limited, present knowledge, I hope this clarifying reply to his comment will offer some tentative answers which may have important implications for the application of the leading sector strategy.

The Leading Sector interpretation of development originates from the observation that all multisectoral economies exhibit a certain degree of intersectoral interdependence, through either the incomes generated in each sector and the corresponding final demand for other products, or through interindustry relations. The sectors in such an economy grow at different rates, as determined by the product of the appropriate income elasticities of demand and the overall growth rate, the latter factor being the weighted sum of the sectoral rates. However in a stagnant economy, as opposed to a dynamic one, even the fastest growing sectors are undynamic. To increase the overall growth rate, the foremost proponents of the leading strategy— Hirschman and Currie—recommend an increase in the growth rate of a few, key, potentially dynamic sectors; then the rest of the economy will be pulled along through the intersectoral relations.