Suchergebnisse

There are three different interpretations of Adam Smith's trade theory in modern literature: first, the neoclassical theory of absolute advantage; second, an interpretation based on increasing returns; third, an interpretation of uneven development. These interpretations come to widely different conclusions, especially considering the development of the pattern of trade in Smith's theory. I discuss how these three interpretations emerged. They do not stem from a more detailed analysis of Smith's works itself but reflect changes within international trade theory. They all result from the fact that economists have imposed nineteenth- and twentieth-century modes of thoughts on Smith's theory, forcing his writings into later-developed theoretical frameworks. In contrast to classical economists in the nineteenth century, these subsequent interpretations misrepresent Smith's trade theory in order to portray him as a forerunner of later theories. The differing interpretations can thus be explained only against the backdrop of the development of international trade theory.

Hla Myint interpreted Adam Smith's "two distinct benefits" from foreign trade as a vent-for-surplus gain and a productivity gain. This classification has been adopted widely, but the vent-for-surplus gain has caused some debates. In this article, I show that Myint's categorization is based on a misinterpretation. Smith's two distinct benefits consist of exports and imports. Additionally, Smith does not expound a vent-for-surplus theory. Besides Smith's true benefits from trade, I discuss reasons for their modern misinterpretation and David Ricardo's and John Stuart Mill's criticism of Smith's theory, which is often misunderstood as well.

This thesis deals with two theories of international trade: the theory of comparative advantage, which is connected to the name David Ricardo and is dominating current trade theory, and Adam Smith's theory of absolute advantage. Both theories are compared and their assumptions are scrutinised. The former theory is rejected on theoretical and empirical grounds in favour of the latter. On the basis of the theory of absolute advantage, developments of free international trade are examined, whereby the focus is on trade between industrial and underdeveloped countries. The main conclusions are that trade patterns are determined by absolute production cost advantages and that the gap between developed and poor countries is not reduced but rather increased by free trade. ; Die vorliegende Publikation vergleicht die zwei zentralen Theorien des internationalen Freihandels: die Theorie der absoluten Kostenvorteile und die Theorie der komparativen Kostenvorteile. Dieser Vergleich führt zu dem Schluss, dass die Theorie der komparativen Kostenvorteile im Gegensatz zu der Theorie der absoluten Kostenvorteile auf unrealistischen und problematischen Annahmen beruht. Im Anschluss werden auf Grundlage der Theorie der absoluten Kostenvorteile zentrale Tendenzen in der Entwicklung des internationalen Handels herausgearbeitet. Im Mittelpunkt steht hierbei die Auswirkung von Freihandel auf entwickelte und unterentwickelte Länder. Die zentralen Schlussfolgerungen dieser Arbeit sind erstens, dass die Richtung des internationalen Handels nicht durch komparative Kostenvorteile, sondern durch absolute Kostenvorteile bestimmt wird und zweitens, dass Freihandel zwar vorteilhaft für unterentwickelte Länder sein kann, aber dass durch Freihandel die Unterschiede zwischen Industrieländern und Entwicklungsländern nicht verkleinert, sondern vergrößert werden.

This thesis deals with two theories of international trade: the theory of comparative advantage, which is connected to the name David Ricardo and is dominating current trade theory, and Adam Smith's theory of absolute advantage. Both theories are compared and their assumptions are scrutinised. The former theory is rejected on theoretical and empirical grounds in favour of the latter. On the basis of the theory of absolute advantage, developments of free international trade are examined, whereby the focus is on trade between industrial and underdeveloped countries. The main conclusions are that trade patterns are determined by absolute production cost advantages and that the gap between developed and poor countries is not reduced but rather increased by free trade.

This thesis deals with two theories of international trade: the theory of comparative advantage, which is connected to the name David Ricardo and is dominating current trade theory, and Adam Smith's theory of absolute advantage. Both theories are compared and their assumptions are scrutinised. The former theory is rejected on theoretical and empirical grounds in favour of the latter. On the basis of the theory of absolute advantage, developments of free international trade are examined, whereby the focus is on trade between industrial and underdeveloped countries. The main conclusions are that trade patterns are determined by absolute production cost advantages and that the gap between developed and poor countries is not reduced but rather increased by free trade.