class: center, middle, inverse, title-slide # 1.8 — The Specific Factors Model ## ECON 324 • International Trade • Fall 2020 ### Ryan Safner
Assistant Professor of Economics
safner@hood.edu
ryansafner/tradeF20
tradeF20.classes.ryansafner.com
--- class: inverse, center, middle ### [Assumptions of the Specific Factors Model](#3) ### [Allocating the Mobile Factor (Labor)](#11) ### [Distribution Effects Using our Two Country Trade Example](#23) ### [Takeaways from the Specific Factors Model](#44) --- class: inverse, center, middle # Assumptions of the Specific Factors Model --- # Assumptions of the Specific Factors Model .pull-left[ - Until now, we've assumed (within each country), factors are mobile - But in truth, some factors are .hi[specific] or .hi[immobile]: can only be used for the production of a specific set of goods or industry - e.g. programmers can only work in software, not in pro-football - e.g. equipment used to make beer barrels cannot switch to producing computer chips - .hi-purple[Opening up trade will affect the distribution of income between fixed and mobile factors] ] .pull-right[ .center[ ![](../images/workers.png) ] ] --- # Assumptions of the Specific Factors Model .pull-left[ - Imagine 2 countries, .blue[Home] and .red[Foreign] - Countries have three factors of production: - labor `\((L)\)` - capital `\((K)\)` - land `\((T)\)` ] .pull-right[ .center[ ![](../images/factors.jpg) ] ] --- # Assumptions of the Specific Factors Model .pull-left[ - Each country has two industries, .b[manufacturing (M)] and .b[agriculture (A)] - .b[Manufacturing] is produced using *capital* and *labor* - .b[Agriculture] is produced using *land* and *labor* - Land and capital are .hi[specific factors], only used to produce one good - Labor is the .hi[mobile factor] that can be used in *either* (or both) sectors ] .pull-right[ .center[ ![:scale 75%](../images/factoryrobots.jpg) ![:scale 75%](../images/peasants1.jpg) ] ] --- # Setting up the Model: Production Function .pull-left[ - An economy's production can be described as a set of production functions for manufacturing `\((m)\)` and agriculture `\((a)\)` `$$\begin{align*} Q_M&=Q_M(K,L_M)\\ Q_A&=Q_A(T,L_A)\\ \end{align*}$$` - Each country can only allocate its labor force between two industries `$$L_M+L_A=\bar{L}$$` ] .pull-right[ .center[ ![:scale 75%](../images/factoryrobots.jpg) ![:scale 75%](../images/peasants1.jpg) ] ] --- # Diminishing Marginal Product of Labor .pull-left[ - Each industry exhibits .hi[diminishing returns to labor] - .hi[Marginal product of labor in manufacturing `\\((MPL_{M})\\)`]: additional manufacturing output produced by adding one more unit of labor (holding `\(K\)` constant) `$$MPL_{M} = \frac{\Delta Q_M}{\Delta L_M}$$` - Declines as more `\(L\)` is added to manufacturing production ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-1-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-2-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # Diminishing Marginal Product of Labor .pull-left[ - Each industry exhibits .hi[diminishing returns to labor] - .hi[Marginal product of labor in agriculture `\\((MPL_{A})\\)`]: additional agriculture output produced by adding one more unit of labor (holding `\(T\)` constant) `$$MPL_{A} = \frac{\Delta Q_A}{\Delta L_A}$$` - Declines as more `\(L\)` is added to agriculture production ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-3-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-4-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # PPF .pull-left[ - We get a PPF with increasing costs again - Let's examine more *why* ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-5-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- class: inverse, center, middle # Allocating the Mobile Factor (Labor) --- # A Note About Labor .pull-left[ .smaller[ - A simple (and very Ricardian) assumption about labor: it is measured in hours, and can equally be applied to each industry `$$\bar{L}=L_M+L_A$$` - Every labor hour allocated to agriculture is a labor hour *not* allocated to manufacturing, and vice versa - .hi-purple[Opportunity cost of labor] - Visualize a “labor budget constraint” to understand movements along the PPF ] ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-6-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # Allocating Labor .pull-left[ .smallest[ - Shows relationship of moving along PPF `\(\iff\)` reallocating labor across industries - If all labor in `\(A\)` (point A), country only produces `\(A\)`, no `\(M\)` - If all labor in `\(M\)` (point D), country only produces `\(M\)`, no `\(A\)` - Remember, each industry has diminishing returns to labor, and will have a particular `\(MPL\)` depending on how much land or capital there are - Hence, a 1 unit `\(\uparrow \downarrow\)` in `\(L\)` in one industry *does not* imply a 1 unit increase ] ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-7-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # Allocating Labor .pull-left[ .smallest[ - As we move to the right of the PPF, we are pulling labor out of agriculture and into manufacturing - Each single unit of labor we take out of `\(A\)` and put into `\(M\)` will: - Lower `\(\downarrow Q_A\)` by `\(MPL_{A}\)` - Raise `\(\uparrow Q_M\)` by `\(MPL_{M}\)` - Or to put it inversely, to produce 1 more unit of `\(M\)`: - Reallocate `\(\downarrow L_A\)` input by `\(\frac{1}{MPL_{A}}\)` - Reallocate `\(\uparrow L_M\)` input by `\(\frac{1}{MPL_{M}}\)` ] ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-8-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # Production Possibilities Frontier .pull-left[ - .hi[Marginal rate of transformation (MRT)] .hi-purple[*increases*] as we produce more of a good - Again: .b[“slope”], .b[“relative price of M”], .b[“opportunity cost of M”] - Amount of `\(A\)` given up to get 1 more `\(M\)` `$$\underbrace{MRT}_{slope}=-\frac{MPL_A}{MPL_M}$$` - Note `\(A (y)\)` on top and `\(M (x)\)` on bottom!<sup>.magenta[†]</sup> .tiny[<sup>.magenta[†]</sup> This is because, if you think in our Ricardian terms, `\\(l_x=\frac{1}{MPL_x}\\)` and `\\(l_y=\frac{1}{MPL_y}\\)`, so `\\(\frac{l_x}{l_y} \implies \frac{MPL_y}{MPL_x}\\)`] ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-9-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # Allocating Labor .pull-left[ .smallest[ - Because of diminishing returns, as we move labor out of `\(A\)` and into `\(M\)`, we lower `\(MPL_M\)` and raise `\(MPL_A\)` - This is why the PPF has increasing opportunity costs, and is bent inwards the way it is! - For a given amount of `\(T\)` and `\(L\)`, we can determine the economy's output bundle `\((Q_M, Q_A)\)` by knowing how much labor is allocated across `\((L_M, L_A)\)` - Now let's find how labor is allocated across industries ] ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-10-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # The Demand for Labor in Competitive Industries .pull-left[ .quitesmall[ - Profit-maximizing firms will hire labor (hours) up to the point where the marginal benefit of hiring labor equals the marginal cost - .red[Marginal cost per labor-hour]: wage `\(w\)` - .blue[Marginal benefit per labor-hour]: marginal revenue product (marginal product `\(\times\)` price of output) - In manufacturing: `$$w = MPL_M * P_M$$` - In agriculture: `$$w = MPL_A * P_A$$` - Again, if you want to remember why, see my slides on [Factor Markets](https://ios20.classes.ryansafner.com/slides/1.8-slides.html#1) ] ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-11-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # The Demand for Labor in Both Industries .pull-left[ - Because we have assumed .hi-purple[labor is mobile] (and homogenous “labor hours”), workers will always move out of a lower-paying industry and into a higher-paying industry - Thus, in equilibrium, wages `\(w\)` must equalize across both industries, with the implication: `$$\begin{align*} w = MPL_M * P_M &= MPL_A * P_A = w\\ -\frac{MPL_A}{MPL_M} &= - \frac{P_M}{P_A}\\ \end{align*}$$` ] .pull-right[ .center[ ![](../images/equilibriumbalance.png) ] ] --- # Labor and the PPF .pull-left[ - Thus, we finally see how it is that the slope of the PPF is equivalent to the relative price of `\(M\)` `$$MRT = -\frac{p_M}{p_A}$$` - (Back to `\(x\)` on top, `\(y\)` on bottom!) - At the optimum production, PPF is tangent to a value line with slope the relative price of `\(M\)` ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-12-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # Labor Allocation .pull-left[ .smallesr[ - We can also visualize the allocation of labor in the country - Recall both industries in equilibrium must charge the same wage `\(w_M=w_A=w^{\star}\)` - Moving from left to right, labor allocated to manufacturing, `\(L_M\)` - Moving from right to left, labor allocated to agriculture, `\(L_A\)` ] ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-13-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # A Change in Relative Prices on Labor Allocation .pull-left[ .smaller[ - An increase in the relative price of manufacturing `\(\left(\frac{p_M}{p_A}\right)\)` will increase the demand for labor in manufacturing - Because both industries have to compete for labor, wages do increase, but not as much as the increase in the relative price of manufacturing - More labor will be used in manufacturing than in agriculture, and thus, the economy will produce more manufacturing and less agriculture ] ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-14-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # A Change in Relative Prices on PPF .pull-left[ - We can equivalently see this on the PPF - Increase in the relative price of manufacturing `$$\bigg(\displaystyle\frac{p_M}{p_A}\bigg)^1 \rightarrow \bigg(\displaystyle\frac{p_M}{p_A}\bigg)^2$$` - Moving from `\(A \rightarrow B\)` - Slope steepens - Country will produce less agriculture, more manufacturing ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-15-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- class: inverse, center, middle # Distribution Effects Using our Two Country Trade Example --- # Our Two Country Trade Example: Autarky .pull-left[ ### .hi-blue[Home] <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-16-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] .pull-right[ ### .hi-red[Foreign] <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-17-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] .smallest[ - Countries begin in .hi[autarky] optimum with different relative prices - A is optimum for .blue[Home] - A' is optimum for .red[Foreign] ] --- # Our Two Country Trade Example: Specialization .pull-left[ ### .hi-blue[Home] <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-18-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] .pull-right[ ### .hi-red[Foreign] <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-19-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] .smallest[ - .blue[Home] has comparative advantage in manufacturing - .red[Foreign] has comparative advantage in agriculture ] --- # Our Two Country Trade Example: Specialization .pull-left[ ### .hi-blue[Home] <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-21-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] .pull-right[ ### .hi-red[Foreign] <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-22-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] .smallest[ - Countries .hi[specialize]: produce *more* of comparative advantaged good, *less* of disadvantaged good - .blue[Home]: A `\(\rightarrow\)` B: produces more M, less A - .red[Foreign]: A' `\(\rightarrow\)` B': produces less M, more A ] --- # Relative Price Changes in Home .pull-left[ - Let's look at three groups at .blue[Home]: - Laborers `\((L)\)` - Capitalists (owners of `\(K)\)` - Landowners (owners of `\(T)\)` - Increase in the relative price of manufacturing from trade - decrease in relative price of agriculture ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-23-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # Effects of Trade on Home's Income Distribution: L .pull-left[ .quitesmall[ - Workers find their wage has increased (but less than increase in relative price of M) `$$\frac{\Delta w}{w_1} < \cfrac{\Delta \left(\frac{P_M}{P_A}\right)}{\left(\frac{P_M}{P_A}\right)_1}$$` - Amount of manufactures `\(Q_M\)` that can be purchased with wages has *fallen*! - .hi-purple[Real wage in terms of manufacturing, `\\(\downarrow \frac{w}{p_M}\\)`] - Amount of agriculture `\(Q_A\)` that can be purchased with wages has *risen*! - .hi-purple[Real wage in terms of agriculture, `\\(\uparrow \frac{w}{p_A}\\)`] - .hi-purple[Effect on workers is ambiguous] - Depends on their consumption preferences between `\(M\)` and `\(A\)` ] ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-24-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # Effects of Trade on Home's Income Distribution: K .pull-left[ .smallest[ - What about capital owners? - Total income to capitalists `\(= \underbrace{(P_M * Q_M)}_{\text{Revenues in M}} - \underbrace{(W * L_M)}_{\text{Labor costs}}\)` - As more labor used in manufacturing, `\(\uparrow MP_K\)`: Each machine has more workers to work it. - .hi-purple[Capital owners gain] - We saw (1) `\(\uparrow\)` relative price of manufacturing and (2) `\(\downarrow\)` real wage in terms of manufacturing - Thus, income to capital will rise more than proportionately to the rise in relative price of manufacturing ] ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-25-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # Advanced Explanation for Capital .pull-left[ .smallest[ - Manufacturing is produced with capital and labor, `\(Q_M = Q_M(K,L_M)\)` - Total output `\(Q_M\)` using `\(L_M\)` is equal to the under the `\(MPL_M\)` curve up to `\(L_M\)` - Labor is paid `\(w = MPL_M * p_M\)` - Rewrite as real wage (in terms of `\(M)\)`: `\(\frac{w}{P_M}\)` - This times the total number of workers `\(L_M\)` equals the .blue[total wages paid] - All .green[residual income] goes to capital owners ] ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-26-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # Advanced Explanation for Capital .pull-left[ .smallest[ - Because trade raises the relative price of manufacturing, `\(\frac{p_M}{p_A}\)`, we saw: - Increase in labor `\(L_M\)`, and increase in *nominal* wage `\(w\)`, but - Decrease in real wage in terms of `\(m\)`, `\(\frac{w}{p_M}\)` - .hi-green[Capital owners gain] ] ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-27-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # Effects of Trade on Home's Income Distribution: T .pull-left[ .smallest[ - What about land owners? - Total income to landowners `\(= \underbrace{(P_AM * Q_A)}_{\text{Revenues in A}} - \underbrace{(W * L_A)}_{\text{Labor costs}}\)` - As less labor used in agriculture, `\(\downarrow MP_T\)`: Each piece of land has fewer workers to work it. - .hi-purple[Land owners lose] - We saw (1) `\(\downarrow\)` relative price of agriculture and (2) `\(\uparrow\)` real wage in terms of agriculture - Thus, income to landowners will fall more than proportionately to the fall in relative price of agriculture ] ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-28-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # Advanced Explanation for Land .pull-left[ .smallest[ - Agriculture is produced with land and labor, `\(Q_A = Q_A(T,L_A)\)` - Total output `\(Q_A\)` using `\(L_A\)` is equal to the under the `\(MPL_A\)` curve up to `\(L_A\)` - Labor is paid `\(w = MPL_A * p_A\)` - Rewrite as real wage (in terms of `\(A)\)`: `\(\frac{w}{P_A}\)` - This times the total number of workers `\(L_A\)` equals the total wages paid - All .green[residual income] goes to land owners (as rent) ] ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-29-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # Advanced Explanation for Land .pull-left[ .smallest[ - Because trade lowers the relative price of agriculture, `\(\frac{p_A}{p_M}\)`, we saw: - Decrease in labor `\(L_A\)`, but increase in *nominal* wage `\(w\)`, so - Increase in real wage in terms of `\(A\)`, `\(\frac{w}{p_A}\)` - .b[Land owners lose] ] ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-30-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # Effects of Trade on Home's Income Distribution .pull-left[ EFfects of trade on .blue[Home]'s: - .b[Labor]: ambiguous - real wage rises in terms of `\(M\)`, falls in terms of `\(A\)` - .b[Capital]: income rises more than proportionate to `\(M\)` relative price increase - .b[Land]: income falls more than proportionate to `\(A\)` relative price fall ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-31-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # Effects of Trade on Home Income Distribution .pull-left[ .smallest[ - .hi-purple[Factor specific to the sector whose relative price rises is *better off* with trade] - Capital for manufacturing - .hi-purple[Factor specific to the sector whose relative price falls is *worse off* with trade] - Land for agriculture - .hi-purple[The mobile factor is *not clearly* better or worse off with trade.] - Labor ] ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-32-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # Specialization (Again) .pull-left[ ### .hi-blue[Home] <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-33-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] .pull-right[ ### .hi-red[Foreign] <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-34-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] .smallest[ - Countries .hi[specialize]: produce *more* of comparative advantaged good, *less* of disadvantaged good - .blue[Home]: A `\(\rightarrow\)` B: produces more M, less A - .red[Foreign]: A' `\(\rightarrow\)` B': produces less M, more A ] --- # Relative Price Changes in Foreign .pull-left[ - Let's look at three groups at .red[Foreign]: - Laborers `\((L)\)` - Capitalists (owners of `\(K)\)` - Landowners (owners of `\(T)\)` - Decrease in the relative price of manufacturing from trade - increase in relative price of agriculture ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-35-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # Effects of Trade on Foreign's Income Distribution: L .pull-left[ .quitesmall[ - Workers find their wage has increased (but less than increase in relative price of A) `$$\frac{\Delta w}{w_1} < \cfrac{\Delta \left(\frac{P_A}{P_M}\right)}{\left(\frac{P_A}{P_M}\right)_1}$$` - Amount of manufactures `\(Q_M\)` that can be purchased with wages has *risen*! - .hi-purple[Real wage in terms of manufacturing, `\\(\uparrow \frac{w}{p_M}\\)`] - Amount of agriculture `\(Q_A\)` that can be purchased with wages has *fallen*! - .hi-purple[Real wage in terms of agriculture, `\\(\downarrow \frac{w}{p_A}\\)`] - .hi-purple[Effect on workers is ambiguous] - Depends on their consumption preferences between `\(M\)` and `\(A\)` ] ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-36-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # Effects of Trade on Foreign's Income Distribution: K .pull-left[ .smallest[ - What about capital owners? - Total income to capitalists `\(= \underbrace{(P_M * Q_M)}_{\text{Revenues in M}} - \underbrace{(W * L_M)}_{\text{Labor costs}}\)` - As less labor used in manufacturing, `\(\downarrow MP_K\)`: Each machine has fewer workers to work it. - .hi-purple[Capital owners lose] - We saw (1) `\(\downarrow\)` relative price of manufacturing and (2) `\(\uparrow\)` real wage in terms of manufacturing - Thus, income to capital will fall more than proportionately to the fall in relative price of manufacturing ] ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-37-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # Effects of Trade on Foreign's Income Distribution: T .pull-left[ .smallest[ - What about land owners? - Total income to landowners `\(= \underbrace{(P_A * Q_A)}_{\text{Revenues in A}} - \underbrace{(W * L_A)}_{\text{Labor costs}}\)` - As more labor used in agriculture, `\(\uparrow MP_T\)`: Each piece of land has more workers to work it. - .hi-purple[Land owners gain] - We saw (1) `\(\uparrow\)` relative price of agriculture and (2) `\(\downarrow\)` real wage in terms of agriculture - Thus, income to landowners will rise more than proportionately to the rise in relative price of agriculture ] ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-38-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # Effects of Trade on Foreign's Income Distribution .pull-left[ EFfects of trade on .red[Foreign]'s: - .b[Labor]: ambiguous - real wage rises in terms of `\(M\)`, falls in terms of `\(A\)` - .b[Capital]: income falls more than proportionate to `\(M\)` relative price fall - .b[Land]: income rises more than proportionate to `\(A\)` relative price increase ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-39-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- # Effects of Trade on Foreign's Income Distribution .pull-left[ .smallest[ - .hi-purple[Factor specific to the sector whose relative price rises is *better off* with trade.] - Land for agriculture - .hi-purple[Factor specific to the sector whose relative price falls is *worse off* with trade.] - Capital for manufacturing - .hi-purple[The mobile factor is *not clearly* better or worse off with trade.] - Labor ] ] .pull-right[ <img src="1.8-slides_files/figure-html/unnamed-chunk-40-1.png" width="504" style="display: block; margin: auto;" /> ] --- class: inverse, center, middle # Takeways from The Specific Factors Model --- # Takeways from The Specific Factors Model .pull-left[ - .hi-purple[Changes in trade fall mainly upon the fixed/specific factors of production] - Increase in relative prices (exports) benefit fixed factor producing exports - Decrease in relative prices (imports) harm fixed factor competing with imports - .hi-purple[Mobile factors face ambiguous change] - Can move from low-income industries to high-income industries ] .pull-right[ .center[ ![](../images/laborvscapital.jpg) ] ] --- # Takeways from The Specific Factors Model .pull-left[ - Of course, our simple model aggregates labor into a single mobile factor - In reality, different types of labor, some may be .hi[mobile] and some may be .hi[immoble] and .hi[specific] - .hu-purple[Changes in trade patterns and relative prices will affect specific and mobile factors differently] ] .pull-right[ .center[ ![](../images/stuck.jpg) ] ] --- # Example of Mobile vs. Specific Labor .pull-left[ .content-box-green[ .hi-green[Example]: Auto-workers in Detroit in the 1980s were a relatively specific and immobile factor - Geographically concentrated - Skills specific to car assembly-lines ] ] .pull-right[ .center[ ![:scale 50%](../images/gmworkers.jpg) ![:scale 50%](../images/gmbuilding.jpg) ] ] --- # Example of Mobile vs. Specific Labor .pull-left[ .smallest[ - Japan begins exporting cheap cars in 1980s, U.S. consumers import them - Relative price of cars falls in U.S., U.S. factories produce fewer cars, wages & jobs in U.S. auto manufacturing diminish - More .hi-purple[mobile] and .hi-purple[nonspecific] workers left Detroit for other industries - e.g. maybe they went to Texas to work in booming oil industry - More .hi-purple[immobile] and .hi-purple[specific] workers lost jobs - Maybe geographically stuck in Detroit - Skills were too specific to auto industry, not transferrable to other industries ] ] .pull-right[ .center[ ![:scale 50%](../images/japan.jpg) ![:scale 50%](../images/car.png) ] ] --- # Some More Examples .center[ ![:scale 80%](../images/feenstramanuf.png) .source[Source: Feenstra & Taylor (2017)] ] --- # Some More Examples .center[ ![:scale 60%](../images/feenstrawages.png) .source[Source: Feenstra & Taylor (2017)] ] --- # Some More Examples .center[ ![:scale 80%](../images/feenstralosses.png) .source[Source: Feenstra & Taylor (2017)] ] --- # Takeways from The Specific Factors Model .pull-left[ .smallest[ - Again, .hi-purple[changes in trade fall mainly upon the fixed/specific factors of production] - Increase in relative prices (exports) benefit fixed factor producing exports - Decrease in relative prices (imports) harm fixed factor competing with imports - .hi-purple[Mobile factors face ambiguous change] - Can move from low-income industries to high-income industries - .hi[Policy implication]: if governments wish to protect domestic groups from adverse trade shocks, increase mobility and non-specific skills/uses - make labor, capital, land markets *more flexible* to reduce shocks from trade on domestic workers, capital-, & land-owners ] ] .pull-right[ .center[ ![](../images/stuck.jpg) ] ]