The Impact of Institutional Quality on Intra-Industry Resource Allocation

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Melitz (2003) embedded heterogeneous firms in monopolistic competition to examine how trade liberalization induces intra-industry reallocation, leading to improvement of aggregate industry productivity. From our perspective, firm productivity results from using heterogeneous inputs. As technology uses more inputs, entry will be harder. In our model, marginal products of inputs are randomly distributed. Choice of inputs incurs additional transaction cost in case of imperfect institution according to Acemenglu et al. (2007). In Melitz (2003), all aggregate variables depend on mass of firms, which is mainly determined by the factor endowment of labor. If the endowment is same over countries under same condition, all aggregates should be equal. However, the transaction cost behind input choices can affect all the aggregates and affect the pattern of trade. The transaction cost can be reduced by a choice of institution. As an extension to the work of Melitz (2003), we will incorporate input choices and institution into the Melitz’s model to show how the distributions of factor inputs affect firm dynamics of entries and exits. Factor endowments determine comparative advantages or patterns of trade. Our paper aims to show that distribution of factors is a determinant as well.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 Amiti, M., "Trade Liberalization, Intermediate Inputs, and Productivity : Evidence from Indonesia" 97 (97): 1611-1638, 2007

2 Topalova, P., "Trade Liberalization and Firm Productivity : The Case of India" 93 (93): 995-1009, 2011

3 Akelof, G., "The Market for ‘Lemons’ : Quality Uncertainty and Market Mechanism" 84 : 488-500, 1970

4 Melitz, M. J., "The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocation and Aggregate Industry Productivity" 71 : 1695-1725, 2003

5 Grossman, G. M., "The Distribution of Talents and the Pattern and Consequences of International Trade" 112 (112): 209-239, 2004

6 이양승, "Strategic Protective Trade Policy under Asymmetric Information" 한국무역연구원 14 (14): 131-143, 2018

7 Bernard, A. B., "Plants and Productivity in International Trade" 93 (93): 1268-1290, 2003

8 Melitz, M. J., "Market Size, Trade, and Productivity" 75 : 295-316, 2008

9 Vogel, J., "Institutions and Moral Hazard in Open Economies" 71 : 495-514, 2007

10 Levchencko, A., "Institutional Quality and International Trade" 74 : 791-819, 2007

11 Helpman, E., "Inequality and Unemployment in a Global Economy" 78 (78): 1239-1283, 2010

12 Halpern, L., "Imported Inputs and Trade" 105 (105): 3660-3703, 2015

13 Grossman, G. M., "Heterogeneous Workers and International Trade" 149 : 211-245, 2013

14 이양승, "Heterogeneous Firms, Factor Productivity and Trade" 한국무역연구원 14 (14): 143-161, 2018

15 이양승, "Factor Heterogeneity, Factor Market Imperfection and Trade" 한국국제경제학회 33 (33): 170-188, 2019

16 Kasahara, H., "Does the Use of Imported Intermediates Increase Productivity? Plant-Level Evidence" 87 (87): 106-118, 2008

17 Grossman, G. M., "Diversity and Trade" 90 (90): 1255-1275, 2000

18 Acemoglu, D., "Contracts and Technology Adoption" 97 (97): 916-943, 2007

19 Bernard, A. B., "Comparative Advantage and Heterogeneous Firms" 74 : 31-66, 2007

20 Nigai, S., "A Tale of Two Tails : Productivity Distribution and the Gains from Trade" 104 : 44-62, 2017

21 Yeaple, S. R., "A Simple Model of Firm Heterogeneity, International Trade, and Wages" 65 : 1-20, 2005