克鲁格曼国际经济学答案
国际经济学克鲁格曼教材答案
C h a p t e r 31．Home has 1200 units of labor available. It can produce two goods, apples and bananas. The unit labor requirement in apple production is 3, while in banana production it is 2.a ．Graph out the production possibilities frontier:b ．What is the opportunity cost of apples in terms of bananasc ．In the absence of trade, what would the price of apples in terms of bananas beIn the absence of trade, since labor is the only factor of production and supply decisions are determined bythe attempts of individuals to maximize their earnings in a competitive economy, only whenLb La b a /a a /P P =will both goods be produced. So 1.5 /P P b a =2．Home is as described in problem 1. There is now also another country, Foreign, with a labor force of 800. Foreign ’s unit labor requirement in apple production is 5, while in banana production it is 1. a ．Graph Foreign ’s production possibilities frontier:b ．3． a ． ∵∴ b ． RD: yx 1= RS: 5]5,5.1[5.1],5.0(5.0)5.0,0[=∈=⎪⎩⎪⎨⎧+∞∈=∈y y y x x x ∴25.0==y x∴2/=b P a P e e c ．Describe the pattern of trade.∵b a b e a e b a P P P P P P ///>>**∴In this two-country world, Home will specialize in the apple production, export apples and import bananas. Foreign will specialize in the banana production, export bananas and import apples.d ．Show that both Home and Foreign gain from trade.International trade allows Home and Foreign to consume anywhere within the colored lines, which lieoutside the countries ’ production possibility frontiers. And the indirect method, specializing in producingonly one production then trade with other country, is a more efficient method than direct production. In the absence of trade, Home could gain three bananas by foregoing two apples, and Foreign could gain by one foregoing five bananas. Trade allows each country to trade two bananas for one apple. Home could thengain four bananas by foregoing two apples while Foreign could gain one apple by foregoing only twobananas. So both Home and Foreign gain from trade.4．Suppose that instead of 1200 workers, Home had 2400. Find the equilibrium relative price. What can you say about the efficiency of world production and the division of the gains from trade between Home and Foreign in this case RD: y x 1= RS: 5]5,5.1[5.1],1(1)1,0[=∈=⎪⎩⎪⎨⎧+∞∈=∈y y y x x x ∴5.132==y x ∴5.1/=b P a P e eIn this case, Foreign will specialize in the banana production, export bananas and import apples. But Homewill produce bananas and apples at the same time. And the opportunity cost of bananas in terms of apples for Home remains the same. So Home neither gains nor loses but Foreign gains from trade.5．Suppose that Home has 2400 workers, but they are only half as production in both industries as we have been assuming, Construct the world relative supply curve and determine the equilibrium relative price. How do the gains from trade compare with those in the case described in problem 4In this case, the labor is doubled while the productivity of labor is halved, so the ＂effective labor ＂remains the same. So the answer is similar to that in 3. And both Home and Foreign can gain from trade. But Foreign gains lesser compare with that in the case 4.6．”Korean workers earn only $ an hour; if we allow Korea to export as much as it likes to the UnitedStates, our workers will be forced down to the same level. You can ’t import a $5 shirt without importing the $ wage that goes with it.” Discuss.In fact, relative wage rate is determined by comparative productivity and the relative demand for goods. Korea ’s low wage reflects the fact that Korea is less productive than the United States in most industries.Actually, trade with a less productive, low wage country can raise the welfare and standard of living ofcountries with high productivity, such as United States. So this pauper labor argument is wrong. 7．Japanese labor productivity is roughly the same as that of the United States in the manufacturing sector (higher in some industries, lower in others), while the United States, is still considerably more productive in the service sector. But most services are non-traded. Some analysts have argued that this poses a problemfor the United States, because our comparative advantage lies in things we cannot sell on world markets. What is wrong with this argumentThe competitive advantage of any industry depends on both the relative productivities of the industries and the relative wages across industries. So there are four aspects should be taken into account before we reachconclusion: both the industries and service sectors of Japan and U.S., not just the two service sectors. So this statement does not bade on the reasonable logic.8．Anyone who has visited Japan knows it is an incredibly expensive place; although Japanese workers earn about the same as their . counterparts, the purchasing power of their incomes is about one-third less. Extend your discussing from question 7 to explain this observation. (Hint: Think about wages and the implied prices of non-trade goods.)The relative higher purchasing power of U.S. is sustained and maintained by its considerably higherproductivity in services. Because most of those services are non-traded, Japanese could not benefit from those lower service costs. And U.S. does not have to face a lower international price of services. So the purchasing power of Japanese is just one-third of their U.S. counterparts.9．How does the fact that many goods are non-traded affect the extent of possible gains from trade Actually the gains from trade depended on the proportion of non-traded goods. The gains will increase as the proportion of non-traded goods decrease.10．We have focused on the case of trade involving only two countries. Suppose that there are many countries capable of producing two goods, and that each country has only one factor of production, labor.What could we say about the pattern of production and in this case (Hint: Try constructing the world relative supply curve.)Any countries to the left of the intersection of the relative demand and relative supply curves export the good in which they have a comparative advantage relative to any country to the right of the intersection. If theintersection occurs in a horizontal portion then the country with that price ratio produces both goods. Chapter 41．In the United States where land is cheap, the ratio of land to labor used in cattle rising is higher than that of land used in wheat growing. But in more crowded countries, where land is expensive and labor is cheap, it is common to raise cows by using less land and more labor than Americans use to grow wheat.Can we still say that raising cattle is land intensive compared with farming wheat Why or why not The definition of cattle growing as land intensive depends on the ratio of land to labor used in production, not on the ratio of land or labor to output. The ratio of land to labor in cattle exceeds the ratio in wheat in the United States, implying cattle is land intensive in the United States. Cattle is land intensive in other countries too if the ratio of land to labor in cattle production exceeds the ratio in wheat production in that country. The comparison between another country and the United States is less relevant for answering the question. 2．Suppose that at current factor prices cloth is produced using 20 hours of labor for each acre of land, and food is produced using only 5 hours of labor per acre of land.a.Suppose that the economy’s total resources are 600 hours of labor and 60 acres of land. Using adiagram determine the allocation of resources.We can solve this algebraically since L=LC+LF=600 and T=TC+TF=60.The solution is LC=400, TC=20, LF=200 and TF=40.b. Now suppose that the labor supply increase first to 800, then 1000, then 1200 hours. Using a diagram like Figure4-6, trace out the changing allocation of resources.c. What would happen if the labor supply were to increase even furtherAt constant factor prices, some labor would be unused, so factor prices would have to change, or there would be unemployment.3. “The world ’s poorest countries cannot find anything to export. There is no resource that is abundant — certainly not capital or land, and in small poor nations not even labor is abundant.” Discuss. The gains from trade depend on comparative rather than absolute advantage. As to poor countries, what matters is not the absolute abundance of factors, but their relative abundance. Poor countries have an abundance of labor relative to capital when compared to more developed countries.4. The U.S. labor movement — which mostly represents blue-collar workers rather than professionals and highly educated workers — has traditionally favored limits on imports form less-affluent countries. Is this a shortsighted policy of a rational one in view of the interests of union members How does the answer depend on the model of trade Labor Land ClothFood 0l 800 0l 1000 0l 1200 Labor Land ClothFoodLC LF TCTFIn the Ricardo’s model, labor gains from trade through an increase in its purchasing power. This result does not support labor union demands for limits on imports from less affluent countries.In the Immobile Factors model labor may gain or lose from trade. Purchasing power in terms of one good will rise, but in terms of the other good it will decline.The Heckscher-Ohlin model directly discusses distribution by considering the effects of trade on the owners of factors of production. In the context of this model, unskilled U.S. labor loses from trade since this group represents the relatively scarce factors in this country. The results from the Heckscher-Ohlin model support labor union demands for import limits.5.There is substantial inequality of wage levels between regions within the United States. For example,wages of manufacturing workers in equivalent jobs are about 20 percent lower in the Southeast than they are in the Far West. Which of the explanations of failure of factor price equalization mightaccount for this How is this case different from the divergence of wages between the United States and Mexico (which is geographically closer to both the . Southeast and the Far West than the Southeast and Far West are to each other)When we employ factor price equalization, we should pay attention to its conditions: both countries/regions produce both goods; both countries have the same technology of production, and the absence of barriers to trade. Inequality of wage levels between regions within the United States may caused by some or all of these reasons.Actually, the barriers to trade always exist in the real world due to transportation costs. And the trade between U.S. and Mexico, by contrast, is subject to legal limits; together with cultural differences that inhibit the flow of technology, this may explain why the difference in wage rates is so much larger.6.Explain why the Leontief paradox and the more recent Bowen, Leamer, and Sveikauskas resultsreported in the text contradict the factor-proportions theory.The factor proportions theory states that countries export those goods whose production is intensive in factors with which they are abundantly endowed. One would expect the United States, which has a high capital/labor ratio relative to the rest of the world, to export capital-intensive goods if the Heckscher-Ohlin theory holds.Leontief found that the United States exported labor-intensive goods. Bowen, Leamer and Sveikauskas found that the correlation between factor endowment and trade patterns is weak for the world as a whole. The data do not support the predictions of the theory that countries' exports and imports reflect the relative endowments of factors.7.In the discussion of empirical results on the Heckscher-Ohlin model, we noted that recent worksuggests that the efficiency of factors of production seems to differ internationally. Explain how this would affect the concept of factor price equalization.If the efficiency of the factors of production differs internationally, the lessons of the Heckscher-Ohlin theory would be applied to “effective factors” which adjust for the differences in technology or worker skills or land quality (for example). The adjusted model has been found to be more successful than the unadjusted model at explaining the pattern of trade between countries. Factor-price equalization concepts would apply to the effective factors. A worker with more skills or in a country with better technology could be considered to be equal to two workers in another country. Thus, the single person would be two effective units of labor. Thus, the one high-skilled worker could earn twice what lower skilled workers do and the price of one effective unit of labor would still be equalized.chapter 81. The import demand equation, MD, is found by subtracting the home supply equation from the home demand equation. This results in MD = 80 - 40 x P. Without trade, domestic prices and quantities adjust such that import demand is zero. Thus, the price in the absence of trade is2.2. a. Foreign's export supply curve, XS, is XS = -40 + 40 x P. In the absence of trade, the price is 1.b. When trade occurs export supply is equal to import demand, XS = MD. Thus, using the equations fromproblems 1 and 2a, P = , and the volume of trade is 20.3. a. The new MD curve is 80 - 40 x (P+t) where t is the specific tariff rate, equal to . (Note: in solving these problems you should be careful about whether a specific tariff or ad valorem tariff is imposed. With an ad valorem tariff, the MD equation would be expressed as MD=80-40 x(1+t)P). The equation for the export supply curve by the foreign country is unchanged. Solving, we find that the world price is $, and thus the internal price at home is $. The volume of trade has been reduced to 10, and the total demand for wheat at home has fallen to 65 (from the free trade level of 70). The total demand for wheat in Foreign has gone up from 50 to 55.b. andc. The welfare of the home country is best studied using the combined numerical and graphicalsolutions presented below in Figure 8-1.where the areas in the figure are:a: 55 (55-50) .5(55-50) (65-55) .5(70-65) (65-55) surplus change: -(a+b+c+d)=. Producer surplus change: a=. Government revenue change: c+e=5. Efficiency losses b+d are exceeded by terms of trade gain e. [Note: in the calculations for the a, b, and d areas a figure of .5 shows up. This is because we are measuring the area of a triangle, which is one-half of the area of the rectangle defined by the product of the horizontal and vertical sides.]4. Using the same solution methodology as in problem 3, when the home country is very small relative to the foreign country, its effects on the terms of trade are expected to be much less. The small country is much more likely to be hurt by its imposition of a tariff. Indeed, this intuition is shown in this problem. The free trade equilibrium is now at the price $ and the trade volume is now $.With the imposition of a tariff of by Home, the new world price is $, the internal home price is $, home demand is units, home supply is and the volume of trade is . When Home is relatively small, the effect of a tariff on world price is smaller than when Home is relatively large. When Foreign and Home were closer in size, a tariffof .5 by home lowered world price by 25 percent, whereas in this case the same tariff lowers world price by about 5 percent. The internal Home price is now closer to the free trade price plus t than when Home was relatively large. In this case, the government revenues from the tariff equal , the consumer surplus loss is , and the producer surplus gain is . The distortionary losses associated with the tariff (areas b+d) sum to and the terms of trade gain (e) is . Clearly, in this small country example the distortionary losses from the tariff swamp the terms of trade gains. The general lesson is the smaller the economy, the larger the losses from a tariff since the terms of trade gains are smaller.5. The effective rate of protection takes into consideration the costs of imported intermediate goods. In this example, half of the cost of an aircraft represents components purchased from other countries. Without the subsidy the aircraft would cost $60 million. The European value added to the aircraft is $30 million. The subsidy cuts the cost of the value added to purchasers of the airplane to $20 million. Thus, the effective rate of protection is (30 - 20)/20 = 50%.6. We first use the foreign export supply and domestic import demand curves to determine the new world price. The foreign supply of exports curve, with a foreign subsidy of 50 percent per unit, becomes XS = -40 +40(1+ x P. The equilibrium world price is and the internal foreign price is . The volume of trade is 32. The foreign demand and supply curves are used to determine the costs and benefits of the subsidy. Construct a diagram similar to that in the text and calculate the area of the various polygons. The government must provide- x 32 = units of output to support the subsidy. Foreign producers surplus rises due to the subsidy by the amount of units of output. Foreign consumers surplus falls due to the higher price by units of the good. Thus, the net loss to Foreign due to the subsidy is + - = units of output. Home consumers and producers face an internal price of as a result of the subsidy. Home consumers surplus rises by 70 x .3 + .5 (6= while Home producers surplus falls by 44 x .3 + .5(6 x .3) = , for a net gain of units of output.7. At a price of $10 per bag of peanuts, Acirema imports 200 bags of peanuts. A quota limiting the import of peanuts to 50 bags has the following effects:a. The price of peanuts rises to $20 per bag.b. The quota rents are ($20 - $10) x 50 = $500.c. The consumption distortion loss is .5 x 100 bags x $10 per bag = $500.d. The production distortion loss is .5 x50 bags x$10 per bag = $250.。
克鲁格曼《国际经济学》计算题及标准答案
1. 在古典贸易模型中,假设A 国有1２0名劳动力，B 国有5０名劳动力,如果生产棉花的话，A 国的人均产量是2吨，B 国也是2吨;要是生产大米的话,A 国的人均产量是１０吨,B 国则是16吨。
画出两国的生产可能性曲线并分析两国中哪一国拥有生产大米的绝对优势？哪一国拥有生产大米的比较优势?思路：B 国由于每人能生产16吨大米，而A 国每人仅生产10吨大米，所以B 国具有生产大米的绝对优势。
从两国生产可能性曲线看出A 国生产大米的机会成本为0．2，而B 国为０.1２５,所以Ｂ国生产大米的机会成本或相对成本低于A 国，Ｂ国生产大米具有比较优势。
2.下表列出了加拿大和中国生产1单位计算机和1单位小麦所需的劳动时间。
假定生产计算机和小麦都只用劳动，加拿大的总劳动为6０0小时，中国总劳动为80０小时。
（1） 计算不发生贸易时各国生产计算机和小麦的产量。
（2） 哪个国家具有生产计算机的比较优势?哪个国家具有生产小麦的比较优势?（3） 如果给定世界价格是１单位计算机交换22单位的小麦,加拿大参与贸易可以从每单位的进口中节省多少劳动时间？中国可以从每单位进口中节省多少劳动时间?如果给定世界价格是1单位计算机交换24单位的小麦,加拿大和中国分别可以从进口每单位的货物中节省多少劳动时间?（4） 在自由贸易的情况下,各国应生产什么产品,数量是多少？整个世界的福利水平是提高还是降低了?试用图分析。
(以效用水平来衡量福利水平）思路：（1） 中国生产计算机的机会成本为100／4=２5,加拿大为６0／3=20（2） 因为加拿大生产计算机的机会成本比中国低,所以加拿大具有生产者计算机的比较优势，中国就具有生产小麦的比较优势。
（3） 如果各国按照比较优势生产和出口,加拿大进口小麦出口计算机,中国进口计算机出口小麦。
加拿大进口一单位小麦需要出口１／22单位计算机，折合成劳动时间来算，生产一单位小麦本国要用3小时，但生产1/22单位计算机本国要用６0/22小时劳动，所以加拿大进口一单位小麦相当于用60/２2小时的劳动换回本国３小时生产的产品,节省了3－60/２2=3/11小时的劳动时间。
国际经济学克鲁格曼课后习题答案章完整版
国际经济学克鲁格曼课后习题答案章集团标准化办公室：[VV986T-J682P28-JP266L8-68PNN]第一章练习与答案1．为什么说在决定生产和消费时，相对价格比绝对价格更重要？答案提示：当生产处于生产边界线上，资源则得到了充分利用，这时，要想增加某一产品的生产，必须降低另一产品的生产，也就是说，增加某一产品的生产是有机会机本（或社会成本）的。
生产可能性边界上任何一点都表示生产效率和充分就业得以实现，但究竟选择哪一点，则还要看两个商品的相对价格，即它们在市场上的交换比率。
相对价格等于机会成本时，生产点在生产可能性边界上的位置也就确定了。
所以，在决定生产和消费时，相对价格比绝对价格更重要。
2．仿效图1—6和图1—7，试推导出Y商品的国民供给曲线和国民需求曲线。
答案提示：3．在只有两种商品的情况下，当一个商品达到均衡时，另外一个商品是否也同时达到均衡？试解释原因。
答案提示：4．如果生产可能性边界是一条直线，试确定过剩供给（或需求）曲线。
答案提示：5．如果改用Y商品的过剩供给曲线（B国）和过剩需求曲线（A国）来确定国际均衡价格，那么所得出的结果与图1—13中的结果是否一致？6．答案提示：国际均衡价格将依旧处于贸易前两国相对价格的中间某点。
7．说明贸易条件变化如何影响国际贸易利益在两国间的分配。
答案提示：一国出口产品价格的相对上升意味着此国可以用较少的出口换得较多的进口产品，有利于此国贸易利益的获得，不过，出口价格上升将不利于出口数量的增加，有损于出口国的贸易利益；与此类似，出口商品价格的下降有利于出口商品数量的增加，但是这意味着此国用较多的出口换得较少的进口产品。
对于进口国来讲，贸易条件变化对国际贸易利益的影响是相反的。
8．如果国际贸易发生在一个大国和一个小国之间，那么贸易后，国际相对价格更接近于哪一个国家在封闭下的相对价格水平？答案提示：贸易后，国际相对价格将更接近于大国在封闭下的相对价格水平。
国际经济学(克鲁格曼)教材答案
Chapter 31．Home has 1200 units of labor available. It can produce two goods, apples and bananas. The unit labor requirement in apple production is 3, while in banana production it is 2. a ．Graph out the production possibilities frontier:b ．What is the opportunity cost of apples in terms of bananas?5.1=LbLa a a c ．In the absence of trade, what would the price of apples in terms of bananas be?In the absence of trade, since labor is the only factor of production and supply decisions aredetermined by the attempts of individuals to maximize their earnings in a competitive economy, only when Lb La b a /a a /P P =will both goods be produced. So 1.5 /P P b a =2．Home is as described in problem 1. There is now also another country, Foreign, with alabor force of 800. Foreign ’s unit labor requirement in apple production is 5, while in banana production it is 1.a ．Graph Foreign ’s production possibilities frontier:b ．Construct the world relative supply curve.Home's PPF 0200400600800200400600800Q apple Q banana Foreign's PPF0200400600800100080160240320400Q*apple Q*banana3．Now suppose world relative demand takes the following form: Demand for apples/demandfor bananas = price of bananas/price of apples.a ．Graph the relative demand curve along with the relative supply curve:a b b a /P P /D D =∵When the market achieves its equilibrium, we have 1b a )(D D -**=++=ba b b a a P P Q Q Q Q ∴RD is a hyperbola xy 1=b ．What is the equilibrium relative price of apples?The equilibrium relative price of apples is determined by the intersection of the RD and RScurves.RD: yx 1= RS: 5]5,5.1[5.1],5.0(5.0)5.0,0[=∈=⎪⎩⎪⎨⎧+∞∈=∈y y y x x x ∴25.0==y x∴2/=b P a P e ec ．Describe the pattern of trade.∵b a b e a e b a P P P P P P ///>>**∴In this two-country world, Home will specialize in the apple production, export apples and import bananas. Foreign will specialize in the banana production, export bananas and import apples.d ．Show that both Home and Foreign gain from trade.International trade allows Home and Foreign to consume anywhere within the coloredlines, which lie outside the countries ’ production possibility frontiers. And the indirect method, specializing in producing only one production then trade with other country, is a more efficient method than direct production. In the absence of trade, Home could gain three bananas by foregoing two apples, and Foreign could gain by one foregoing five bananas. Trade allows each country to trade two bananas for one apple. Home could then gain four bananas by foregoing two apples while Foreign could gain one apple by foregoing only two bananas. So both Home and Foreign gain from trade.4．Suppose that instead of 1200 workers, Home had 2400. Find the equilibrium relative price. What can you say about the efficiency of world production and the division of the gains from trade between Home and Foreign in this case?RD: yx 1= RS: 5]5,5.1[5.1],1(1)1,0[=∈=⎪⎩⎪⎨⎧+∞∈=∈y y y x x x ∴5.132==y x ∴5.1/=b P a P e eIn this case, Foreign will specialize in the banana production, export bananas and import apples. But Home will produce bananas and apples at the same time. And the opportunity cost of bananas in terms of apples for Home remains the same. So Home neither gains nor loses but Foreign gains from trade.5．Suppose that Home has 2400 workers, but they are only half as production in both industries as we have been assuming, Construct the world relative supply curve and determine the equilibrium relative price. How do the gains from trade compare with those in the case described in problem 4?In this case, the labor is doubled while the productivity of labor is halved, so the ＂effective labor＂remains the same. So the answer is similar to that in 3. And both Home and Foreign can gain from trade. But Foreign gains lesser compare with that in the case 4.6．”Korean workers earn only $ an hour; if we allow Korea to export as much as it likes to the United States, our workers will be forced down to the same level. You can’t import a $5 shirt without importing the $ wage that goes with it.” Discuss.In fact, relative wage rate is determined by comparative productivity and the relative demand for goods. Korea’s low wage reflects the fact that Korea is less productive than the United States in most industries. Actually, trade with a less productive, low wage country can raise the welfare and standard of living of countries with high productivity, such as United States. Sothis pauper labor argument is wrong.7．Japanese labor productivity is roughly the same as that of the United States in the manufacturing sector (higher in some industries, lower in others), while the United States, is still considerably more productive in the service sector. But most services are non-traded. Some analysts have argued that this poses a problem for the United States, because our comparative advantage lies in things we cannot sell on world markets. What is wrong with this argument?The competitive advantage of any industry depends on both the relative productivities of the industries and the relative wages across industries. So there are four aspects should be taken into account before we reach conclusion: both the industries and service sectors of Japan and U.S., not just the two service sectors. So this statement does not bade on the reasonable logic. 8．Anyone who has visited Japan knows it is an incredibly expensive place; although Japanese workers earn about the same as their . counterparts, the purchasing power of their incomes is about one-third less. Extend your discussing from question 7 to explain this observation. (Hint: Think about wages and the implied prices of non-trade goods.) The relative higher purchasing power of U.S. is sustained and maintained by its considerably higher productivity in services. Because most of those services are non-traded, Japanese could not benefit from those lower service costs. And U.S. does not have to face a lower international price of services. So the purchasing power of Japanese is just one-third of their U.S. counterparts.9．How does the fact that many goods are non-traded affect the extent of possible gains from trade?Actually the gains from trade depended on the proportion of non-traded goods. The gains will increase as the proportion of non-traded goods decrease.10．We have focused on the case of trade involving only two countries. Suppose that there are many countries capable of producing two goods, and that each country has only one factor of production, labor. What could we say about the pattern of production and in this case? (Hint: Try constructing the world relative supply curve.)Any countries to the left of the intersection of the relative demand and relative supply curves export the good in which they have a comparative advantage relative to any country to the right of the intersection. If the intersection occurs in a horizontal portion then the country with that price ratio produces both goods.Chapter 41． In the United States where land is cheap, the ratio of land to labor used in cattle rising ishigher than that of land used in wheat growing. But in more crowded countries, where land is expensive and labor is cheap, it is common to raise cows by using less land and more labor than Americans use to grow wheat. Can we still say that raising cattle is land intensive compared with farming wheat? Why or why not?The definition of cattle growing as land intensive depends on the ratio of land to labor used inproduction, not on the ratio of land or labor to output. The ratio of land to labor in cattle exceeds the ratio in wheat in the United States, implying cattle is land intensive in the United States. Cattle is land intensive in other countries too if the ratio of land to labor in cattle production exceeds the ratio in wheat production in that country. The comparison between another country and the United States is less relevant for answering the question.2． Suppose that at current factor prices cloth is produced using 20 hours of labor for eachacre of land, and food is produced using only 5 hours of labor per acre of land.a. Suppose that the economy ’s total resources are 600 hours of labor and 60 acres ofland. Using a diagram determine the allocation of resources.5TF LF /TF LF /QF)(TF / /QF)(LF aTF / aLF 20TC LC /TC LC /QC)(TC / /QC)(LC aTC / aLC =⇒===⇒==We can solve this algebraically since L=LC+LF=600 and T=TC+TF=60. The solution is LC=400, TC=20, LF=200 and TF=40.b. Now suppose that the labor supply increase first to 800, then 1000, then 1200 hours. Using a diagram like Figure4-6, trace out the changing allocation of resources. Labor Land ClothFoodLCLF TCTFtion).specializa (complete 0.LF 0,TF 1200,LC 60,TC :1200L 66.67LF 13.33,TF 933.33,LC 46.67,TC :1000L 133.33LF 26.67,TF 666.67,LC 33.33,TC :800L ===============c. What would happen if the labor supply were to increase even further?At constant factor prices, some labor would be unused, so factor prices would have tochange, or there would be unemployment.3. “The world ’s poorest countries cannot find anything to export. There is no resource thatis abundant — certainly not capital or land, and in small poor nations not even labor is abundant.” Discuss.The gains from trade depend on comparative rather than absolute advantage. As to poor countries, what matters is not the absolute abundance of factors, but their relative abundance. Poor countries have an abundance of labor relative to capital when compared to more developed countries.4. The U.S. labor movement — which mostly represents blue-collar workers rather thanprofessionals and highly educated workers — has traditionally favored limits on imports form less-affluent countries. Is this a shortsighted policy of a rational one in view of the interests of union members? How does the answer depend on the model of trade?In the Ricardo ’s model, labor gains from trade through an increase in its purchasing power. This result does not support labor union demands for limits on imports from less affluent countries.In the Immobile Factors model labor may gain or lose from trade. Purchasing power in terms of one good will rise, but in terms of the other good it will decline.The Heckscher-Ohlin model directly discusses distribution by considering the effects of trade on the owners of factors of production. In the context of this model, unskilled U.S. labor loses from trade since this group represents the relatively scarce factors in this country. The results from the Heckscher-Ohlin model support labor union demands for import limits. 5. There is substantial inequality of wage levels between regions within the United States. Labor Land Cloth Food0l 800 0l 1000 0l 1200For example, wages of manufacturing workers in equivalent jobs are about 20 percent lower in the Southeast than they are in the Far West. Which of the explanations of failure of factor price equalization might account for this? How is this case different from the divergence of wages between the United States and Mexico (which is geographically closer to both the . Southeast and the Far West than the Southeast and Far West are to each other)?When we employ factor price equalization, we should pay attention to its conditions: both countries/regions produce both goods; both countries have the same technology of production, and the absence of barriers to trade. Inequality of wage levels between regions within the United States may caused by some or all of these reasons.Actually, the barriers to trade always exist in the real world due to transportation costs. And the trade between U.S. and Mexico, by contrast, is subject to legal limits; together with cultural differences that inhibit the flow of technology, this may explain why the difference in wage rates is so much larger.6.Explain why the Leontief paradox and the more recent Bowen, Leamer, andSveikauskas results reported in the text contradict the factor-proportions theory.The factor proportions theory states that countries export those goods whose production is intensive in factors with which they are abundantly endowed. One would expect the United States, which has a high capital/labor ratio relative to the rest of the world, to export capital-intensive goods if the Heckscher-Ohlin theory holds. Leontief found that the United States exported labor-intensive goods. Bowen, Leamer and Sveikauskas found that the correlation between factor endowment and trade patterns is weak for the world as a whole.The data do not support the predictions of the theory that countries' exports and imports reflect the relative endowments of factors.7.In the discussion of empirical results on the Heckscher-Ohlin model, we noted thatrecent work suggests that the efficiency of factors of production seems to differ internationally. Explain how this would affect the concept of factor price equalization.If the efficiency of the factors of production differs internationally, the lessons of the Heckscher-Ohlin theory would be applied to “effective factors” which adjust for the differences in technology or worker skills or land quality (for example). The adjusted model has been found to be more successful than the unadjusted model at explaining the pattern of trade between countries. Factor-price equalization concepts would apply to the effective factors. A worker with more skills or in a country with better technology could be considered to be equal to two workers in another country. Thus, the single person would be two effective units of labor. Thus, the one high-skilled worker could earn twice what lower skilled workers do and the price of one effective unit of labor would still be equalized.chapter 81. The import demand equation, MD, is found by subtracting the home supply equation from the home demand equation. This results in MD = 80 - 40 x P. Without trade, domestic prices and quantities adjust such that import demand is zero. Thus, the price in the absence of trade is2.2. a. Foreign's export supply curve, XS, is XS = -40 + 40 x P. In the absence of trade, the price is 1.b. When trade occurs export supply is equal to import demand, XS = MD. Thus, using theequations from problems 1 and 2a, P = , and the volume of trade is 20.3. a. The new MD curve is 80 - 40 x (P+t) where t is the specific tariff rate, equal to . (Note: in solving these problems you should be careful about whether a specific tariff or ad valorem tariff is imposed. With an ad valorem tariff, the MD equation would be expressed as MD =80-40 x (1+t)P). The equation for the export supply curve by the foreign country is unchanged. Solving, we find that the world price is $, and thus the internal price at home is $. The volume of trade has been reduced to 10, and the total demand for wheat at home has fallen to 65 (from the free trade level of70). The total demand for wheat in Foreign has gone up from 50 to 55.b. andc. The welfare of the home country is best studied using the combined numerical andgraphical solutions presented below in Figure 8-1. Home SupplyHome Demanda b c d e P T =1.7550556070QuantityPrice P W =1.50P T*=1.25where the areas in the figure are:a: 55 (55-50) .5(55-50) (65-55) .5(70-65) (65-55) surplus change: -(a+b+c+d)=. Producer surplus change: a=. Government revenue change: c+e=5. Efficiency losses b+d are exceeded by terms of trade gain e. [Note: in the calculations for the a, b, and d areas a figure of .5 shows up. This is because we are measuring the area of a triangle, which is one-half of the area of the rectangle defined by the product of the horizontal and vertical sides.]4. Using the same solution methodology as in problem 3, when the home country is very small relative to the foreign country, its effects on the terms of trade are expected to be much less. The small country is much more likely to be hurt by its imposition of a tariff. Indeed, this intuition is shown in this problem. The free trade equilibrium is now at the price $ and the trade volume is now $.With the imposition of a tariff of by Home, the new world price is $, the internal home price is $, home demand is units, home supply is and the volume of trade is . When Home is relatively small, the effect of a tariff on world price is smaller than when Home is relatively large. When Foreign and Home were closer in size, a tariff of .5 by home lowered world price by 25 percent, whereas in this case the same tariff lowers world price by about 5 percent. The internal Home price is now closer to the free trade price plus t than when Home was relatively large. In this case, the government revenues from the tariff equal , the consumer surplus loss is , and the producer surplus gain is . The distortionary losses associated with the tariff (areas b+d) sum to and the terms of trade gain (e) is . Clearly, in this small country example the distortionary losses from the tariff swamp the terms of trade gains. The general lesson is the smaller the economy,the larger the losses from a tariff since the terms of trade gains are smaller.5. The effective rate of protection takes into consideration the costs of imported intermediate goods. In this example, half of the cost of an aircraft represents components purchased from other countries. Without the subsidy the aircraft would cost $60 million. The European value added to the aircraft is $30 million. The subsidy cuts the cost of the value added to purchasers of the airplane to $20 million. Thus, the effective rate of protection is (30 - 20)/20 = 50%.6. We first use the foreign export supply and domestic import demand curves to determine the new world price. The foreign supply of exports curve, with a foreign subsidy of 50 percent per unit, becomes XS = -40 + 40(1+ x P. The equilibrium world price is and the internal foreign price is . The volume of trade is 32. The foreign demand and supply curves are used to determine the costs and benefits of the subsidy. Construct a diagram similar to that in the text and calculate the area of the various polygons. The government must provide - x 32 = units of output to support the subsidy. Foreign producers surplus rises due to the subsidy by the amount of units of output. Foreign consumers surplus falls due to the higher price by units of the good. Thus, the net loss to Foreign due to the subsidy is + - = units of output. Home consumers and producers face an internal price of as a result of the subsidy. Home consumers surplus rises by 70 x .3 + .5 (6= while Home producers surplus falls by 44 x .3 + .5(6 x .3) = , for a net gain of units of output.7. At a price of $10 per bag of peanuts, Acirema imports 200 bags of peanuts. A quota limiting the import of peanuts to 50 bags has the following effects:a. The price of peanuts rises to $20 per bag.b. The quota rents are ($20 - $10) x 50 = $500.c. The consumption distortion loss is .5 x 100 bags x $10 per bag = $500.d. The production distortion loss is .5 x50 bags x$10 per bag = $250.。
克鲁格曼国际经济学课后答案
克鲁格曼国际经济学课后答案【篇一：克鲁格曼《国际经济学》(国际金融)习题答案要点】lass=txt>第12章国民收入核算和国际收支1、如问题所述，gnp仅仅包括最终产品和服务的价值是为了避免重复计算的问题。
在国民收入账户中，如果进口的中间品价值从gnp中减去，出口的中间品价值加到gnp中，重复计算的问题将不会发生。
例如：美国分别销售钢材给日本的丰田公司和美国的通用汽车公司。
其中出售给通用公司的钢材，作为中间品其价值不被计算到美国的gnp中。
出售给日本丰田公司的钢材，钢材价值通过丰田公司进入日本的gnp，而最终没有进入美国的国民收入账户。
所以这部分由美国生产要素创造的中间品价值应该从日本的gnp中减去，并加入美国的gnp。
2、（1）等式12-2可以写成ca?(sp?i)?(t?g)。
美国更高的进口壁垒对私人储蓄、投资和政府赤字有比较小或没有影响。
（2）既然强制性的关税和配额对这些变量没有影响，所以贸易壁垒不能减少经常账户赤字。
不同情况对经常账户产生不同的影响。
例如，关税保护能提高被保护行业的投资，从而使经常账户恶化。
（当然，使幼稚产业有一个设备现代化机会的关税保护是合理的。
）同时，当对投资中间品实行关税保护时，由于受保护行业成本的提高可能使该行业投资下降，从而改善经常项目。
一般地，永久性和临时性的关税保护有不同的效果。
这个问题的要点是：政策影响经常账户方式需要进行一般均衡、宏观分析。
3、（1）、购买德国股票反映在美国金融项目的借方。
相应地，当美国人通过他的瑞士银行账户用支票支付时，因为他对瑞士请求权减少，故记入美国金融项目的贷方。
这是美国用一个外国资产交易另外一种外国资产的案例。
（2）、同样，购买德国股票反映在美国金融项目的借方。
当德国销售商将美国支票存入德国银行并且银行将这笔资金贷给德国进口商（此时，记入美国经常项目的贷方）或贷给个人或公司购买美国资产（此时，记入美国金融项目的贷方）。
最后，银行采取的各项行为将导致记入美国国际收支表的贷方。
国际经济学克鲁格曼教材答案
C h a p t e r 31．Home has 1200 units of labor available. It can produce two goods, apples and bananas. The unit labor requirement in apple production is 3, while in banana production it is 2.a ．Graph out the production possibilities frontier:b ．What is the opportunity cost of apples in terms of bananas?c ．In the absence of trade, what would the price of apples in terms of bananas be?In the absence of trade, since labor is the only factor of production and supply decisions are determined bythe attempts of individuals to maximize their earnings in a competitive economy, only when Lb La b a /a a /P P =will both goods be produced. So 1.5 /P P b a =2．Home is as described in problem 1. There is now also another country, Foreign, with a labor force of 800. Foreign ’s unit labor requirement in apple production is 5, while in banana production it is 1. a ．Graph Foreign ’s production possibilities frontier:b ．3． a ． ∵∴ b ． RD: yx 1= RS: 5]5,5.1[5.1],5.0(5.0)5.0,0[=∈=⎪⎩⎪⎨⎧+∞∈=∈y y y x x x ∴25.0==y x∴2/=b P a P e e c ．Describe the pattern of trade.∵b a b e a e b a P P P P P P ///>>**∴In this two-country world, Home will specialize in the apple production, export apples and import bananas. Foreign will specialize in the banana production, export bananas and import apples.d ．Show that both Home and Foreign gain from trade.International trade allows Home and Foreign to consume anywhere within the colored lines, which lieoutside the countries ’ production possibility frontiers. And the indirect method, specializing in producingonly one production then trade with other country, is a more efficient method than direct production. In the absence of trade, Home could gain three bananas by foregoing two apples, and Foreign could gain by one foregoing five bananas. Trade allows each country to trade two bananas for one apple. Home could then gain four bananas by foregoing two apples while Foreign could gain one apple by foregoing only two bananas. So both Home and Foreign gain from trade.4．Suppose that instead of 1200 workers, Home had 2400. Find the equilibrium relative price. What can you say about the efficiency of world production and the division of the gains from trade between Home and Foreign in this case? RD: y x 1= RS: 5]5,5.1[5.1],1(1)1,0[=∈=⎪⎩⎪⎨⎧+∞∈=∈y y y x x x ∴5.132==y x ∴5.1/=b P a P e eIn this case, Foreign will specialize in the banana production, export bananas and import apples. But Homewill produce bananas and apples at the same time. And the opportunity cost of bananas in terms of apples for Home remains the same. So Home neither gains nor loses but Foreign gains from trade.5．Suppose that Home has 2400 workers, but they are only half as production in both industries as we have been assuming, Construct the world relative supply curve and determine the equilibrium relative price. How do the gains from trade compare with those in the case described in problem 4?In this case, the labor is doubled while the productivity of labor is halved, so the ＂effective labor ＂remains the same. So the answer is similar to that in 3. And both Home and Foreign can gain from trade. But Foreign gains lesser compare with that in the case 4.6．”Korean workers earn only $2.50 an hour; if we allow Korea to export as much as it likes to the United States, our workers will be forced down to the same level. You can ’t import a $5 shirt without importing the $2.50 wage that goes with it.” Discuss.In fact, relative wage rate is determined by comparative productivity and the relative demand for goods. Korea ’s low wage reflects the fact that Korea is less productive than the United States in most industries.Actually, trade with a less productive, low wage country can raise the welfare and standard of living of countries with high productivity, such as United States. So this pauper labor argument is wrong. 7．Japanese labor productivity is roughly the same as that of the United States in the manufacturing sector (higher in some industries, lower in others), while the United States, is still considerably more productive in the service sector. But most services are non-traded. Some analysts have argued that this poses a problem for the United States, because our comparative advantage lies in things we cannot sell on world markets. What is wrong with this argument?The competitive advantage of any industry depends on both the relative productivities of the industries and the relative wages across industries. So there are four aspects should be taken into account before we reach conclusion: both the industries and service sectors of Japan and U.S., not just the two service sectors. So this statement does not bade on the reasonable logic.8．Anyone who has visited Japan knows it is an incredibly expensive place; although Japanese workers earn about the same as their U.S. counterparts, the purchasing power of their incomes is about one-third less. Extend your discussing from question 7 to explain this observation. (Hint: Think about wages and the implied prices of non-trade goods.)The relative higher purchasing power of U.S. is sustained and maintained by its considerably higher productivity in services. Because most of those services are non-traded, Japanese could not benefit from those lower service costs. And U.S. does not have to face a lower international price of services. So the purchasing power of Japanese is just one-third of their U.S. counterparts.9．How does the fact that many goods are non-traded affect the extent of possible gains from trade?Actually the gains from trade depended on the proportion of non-traded goods. The gains will increase as the proportion of non-traded goods decrease.10．We have focused on the case of trade involving only two countries. Suppose that there are many countries capable of producing two goods, and that each country has only one factor of production, labor.What could we say about the pattern of production and in this case? (Hint: Try constructing the world relative supply curve.)Any countries to the left of the intersection of the relative demand and relative supply curves export the good in which they have a comparative advantage relative to any country to the right of the intersection. If the intersection occurs in a horizontal portion then the country with that price ratio produces both goods.Chapter 41．In the United States where land is cheap, the ratio of land to labor used in cattle rising is higher than that of land used in wheat growing. But in more crowded countries, where land is expensive and labor is cheap, it is common to raise cows by using less land and more labor than Americans use to grow wheat.Can we still say that raising cattle is land intensive compared with farming wheat? Why or why not?The definition of cattle growing as land intensive depends on the ratio of land to labor used in production, not on the ratio of land or labor to output. The ratio of land to labor in cattle exceeds the ratio in wheat in the United States, implying cattle is land intensive in the United States. Cattle is land intensive in other countries too if the ratio of land to labor in cattle production exceeds the ratio in wheat production in that country. The comparison between another country and the United States is less relevant for answering the question. 2．Suppose that at current factor prices cloth is produced using 20 hours of labor for each acre of land, and food is produced using only 5 hours of labor per acre of land.a.Suppose that the economy’s total resources are 600 hours of labor and 60 acres of land. Using adiagram determine the allocation of resources.We can solve this algebraically since L=LC+LF=600 and T=TC+TF=60.The solution is LC=400, TC=20, LF=200 and TF=40.b. Now suppose that the labor supply increase first to 800, then 1000, then 1200 hours. Using a diagram like Figure4-6, trace out the changing allocation of resources.c. What would happen if the labor supply were to increase even further?At constant factor prices, some labor would be unused, so factor prices would have to change, or there would be unemployment.3. “The world ’s poorest countries cannot find anything to export. There is no resource that is abundant — certainly not capital or land, and in small poor nations not even labor is abundant.” Discuss.The gains from trade depend on comparative rather than absolute advantage. As to poor countries, what matters is not the absolute abundance of factors, but their relative abundance. Poor countries have an abundance of labor relative to capital when compared to more developed countries.4. The U.S. labor movement — which mostly represents blue-collar workers rather than professionals and highly educated workers — has traditionally favored limits on imports form less-affluent countries. Is this a shortsighted policy of a rational one in view of the interests of union members? How does the answer depend on the model of trade? Labor Land ClothFood 0l 800 0l 1000 0l 1200 Labor Land ClothFoodLC LF TCTFIn the Ricardo’s model, labor gains from trade through an increase in its purchasing power. This result does not support labor union demands for limits on imports from less affluent countries.In the Immobile Factors model labor may gain or lose from trade. Purchasing power in terms of one good will rise, but in terms of the other good it will decline.The Heckscher-Ohlin model directly discusses distribution by considering the effects of trade on the owners of factors of production. In the context of this model, unskilled U.S. labor loses from trade since this group represents the relatively scarce factors in this country. The results from the Heckscher-Ohlin model support labor union demands for import limits.5.There is substantial inequality of wage levels between regions within the United States. For example,wages of manufacturing workers in equivalent jobs are about 20 percent lower in the Southeast than they are in the Far West. Which of the explanations of failure of factor price equalization might account for this? How is this case different from the divergence of wages between the United States and Mexico (which is geographically closer to both the U.S. Southeast and the Far West than the Southeast and Far West are to each other)?When we employ factor price equalization, we should pay attention to its conditions: both countries/regions produce both goods; both countries have the same technology of production, and the absence of barriers to trade. Inequality of wage levels between regions within the United States may caused by some or all of these reasons.Actually, the barriers to trade always exist in the real world due to transportation costs. And the trade between U.S. and Mexico, by contrast, is subject to legal limits; together with cultural differences that inhibit the flow of technology, this may explain why the difference in wage rates is so much larger.6.Explain why the Leontief paradox and the more recent Bowen, Leamer, and Sveikauskas resultsreported in the text contradict the factor-proportions theory.The factor proportions theory states that countries export those goods whose production is intensive in factors with which they are abundantly endowed. One would expect the United States, which has a high capital/labor ratio relative to the rest of the world, to export capital-intensive goods if the Heckscher-Ohlin theory holds.Leontief found that the United States exported labor-intensive goods. Bowen, Leamer and Sveikauskas found that the correlation between factor endowment and trade patterns is weak for the world as a whole. The data do not support the predictions of the theory that countries' exports and imports reflect the relative endowments of factors.7.In the discussion of empirical results on the Heckscher-Ohlin model, we noted that recent worksuggests that the efficiency of factors of production seems to differ internationally. Explain how this would affect the concept of factor price equalization.If the efficiency of the factors of production differs internationally, the lessons of the Heckscher-Ohlin theory would be applied to “effective factors” which adjust for the differences in technology or worker skills or land quality (for example). The adjusted model has been found to be more successful than the unadjusted model at explaining the pattern of trade between countries. Factor-price equalization concepts would apply to the effective factors. A worker with more skills or in a country with better technology could be considered to be equal to two workers in another country. Thus, the single person would be two effective units of labor. Thus, the one high-skilled worker could earn twice what lower skilled workers do and the price of one effective unit of labor would still be equalized.chapter 81. The import demand equation, MD, is found by subtracting the home supply equation from the home demand equation. This results in MD = 80 - 40 x P. Without trade, domestic prices and quantities adjust such that import demand is zero. Thus, the price in the absence of trade is2.2. a. Foreign's export supply curve, XS, is XS = -40 + 40 x P. In the absence of trade, the price is 1.b. When trade occurs export supply is equal to import demand, XS = MD. Thus, using the equations fromproblems 1 and 2a, P = 1.50, and the volume of trade is 20.3. a. The new MD curve is 80 - 40 x (P+t) where t is the specific tariff rate, equal to 0.5. (Note: in solving these problems you should be careful about whether a specific tariff or ad valorem tariff is imposed. With an ad valorem tariff, the MD equation would be expressed as MD=80-40 x(1+t)P). The equation for the export supply curve by the foreign country is unchanged. Solving, we find that the world price is $1.25, and thus the internal price at home is $1.75. The volume of trade has been reduced to 10, and the total demand for wheat at home has fallen to65 (from the free trade level of 70). The total demand for wheat in Foreign has gone up from 50 to 55.b. andc. The welfare of the home country is best studied using the combined numerical and graphicalsolutions presented below in Figure 8-1.where the areas in the figure are:a: 55(1.75-1.50) -.5(55-50)(1.75-1.50)=13.125b: .5(55-50)(1.75-1.50)=0.625c: (65-55)(1.75-1.50)=2.50d: .5(70-65)(1.75-1.50)=0.625e: (65-55)(1.50-1.25)=2.50Consumer surplus change: -(a+b+c+d)=-16.875. Producer surplus change: a=13.125. Government revenue change: c+e=5. Efficiency losses b+d are exceeded by terms of trade gain e. [Note: in the calculations for the a, b, and d areas a figure of .5 shows up. This is because we are measuring the area of a triangle, which is one-half of the area of the rectangle defined by the product of the horizontal and vertical sides.]4. Using the same solution methodology as in problem 3, when the home country is very small relative to the foreign country, its effects on the terms of trade are expected to be much less. The small country is much more likely to be hurt by its imposition of a tariff. Indeed, this intuition is shown in this problem. The free trade equilibrium is now at the price $1.09 and the trade volume is now $36.40.With the imposition of a tariff of 0.5 by Home, the new world price is $1.045, the internal home price is $1.545, home demand is 69.10 units, home supply is 50.90 and the volume of trade is 18.20. When Home is relatively small, the effect of a tariff on world price is smaller than when Home is relatively large. When Foreign and Home were closer in size, a tariff of .5 by home lowered world price by 25 percent, whereas in this case the same tariff lowers world price by about 5 percent. The internal Home price is now closer to the free trade price plus t than when Home was relatively large. In this case, the government revenues from the tariff equal 9.10, the consumer surplus loss is 33.51, and the producer surplus gain is 21.089. The distortionary losses associated with the tariff (areas b+d) sum to 4.14 and the terms of trade gain (e) is 0.819. Clearly, in this small country example the distortionary losses from the tariff swamp the terms of trade gains. The general lesson is the smaller the economy, the larger the losses from a tariff since the terms of trade gains are smaller.5. The effective rate of protection takes into consideration the costs of imported intermediate goods. In this example, half of the cost of an aircraft represents components purchased from other countries. Without the subsidy the aircraft would cost $60 million. The European value added to the aircraft is $30 million. The subsidy cuts the cost of the value added to purchasers of the airplane to $20 million. Thus, the effective rate of protection is (30 - 20)/20 = 50%.6. We first use the foreign export supply and domestic import demand curves to determine the new world price. The foreign supply of exports curve, with a foreign subsidy of 50 percent per unit, becomes XS= -40 + 40(1+0.5) x P. The equilibrium world price is 1.2 and the internal foreign price is 1.8. The volume of trade is 32. The foreign demand and supply curves are used to determine the costs and benefits of the subsidy. Construct a diagram similar to that in the text and calculate the area of the various polygons. The government must provide (1.8 - 1.2) x 32 = 19.2 units of output to support the subsidy. Foreign producers surplus rises due tothe subsidy by the amount of 15.3 units of output. Foreign consumers surplus falls due to the higher price by 7.5 units of the good. Thus, the net loss to Foreign due to the subsidy is 7.5 + 19.2 - 15.3 = 11.4 units of output. Home consumers and producers face an internal price of 1.2 as a result of the subsidy. Home consumers surplus rises by 70 x .3 + .5 (6 x.3) = 21.9 while Home producers surplus falls by 44 x .3 + .5(6 x .3) = 14.1, for a net gain of 7.8 units of output.7. At a price of $10 per bag of peanuts, Acirema imports 200 bags of peanuts. A quota limiting the import of peanuts to 50 bags has the following effects:a. The price of peanuts rises to $20 per bag.b. The quota rents are ($20 - $10) x 50 = $500.c. The consumption distortion loss is .5 x 100 bags x $10 per bag = $500.d. The production distortion loss is .5 x50 bags x$10 per bag = $250.。
克鲁格曼国际经济学答案53129
Chapter 31. In 1986, the price of oil on world markets dropped sharply. Since the UnitedStates is an oil-importing country, this was widely regarded as good for the U.S. economy. Yet in Texas and Louisiana 1986 was a year of economic decline. Why?It can deduce that Texas and Louisiana are oil-producing states of United States. So when the price of oil on world markets declined, the real wage of this industry fell in terms of other goods. This might be the reason of economic decline in these two states in 1986.2。
An economy can produce good 1 using labor and capital and good 2 using labor and land. The total supply of labor is 100 units. Given the supply of capital, the outputs of the two goods depends on labor input as follows:To analyze the economy ’s production possibility frontier, consider how theoutput mix changes as labor is shifted between the two sectors.a. Graph the production functions for good 1 and good 2.),(),(22221111L K Q Q L K Q Q ==Production Function for Good 1025.138.148.657.56673.680.787.493.910001020304050607080901000102030405060708090100Labor Input for Good 1Output Production Function for Good 239.852.561.869.375.881.586.791.495.5100405060708090100Outputb. Graph the production possibility frontier. Why is it curved?The PPF is curved due to declining marginal product of labor in each good. Thetotal labor supply is fixed. So as L 1 rises, MPL 1 falls; correspondingly, as L 2 falls, MPL 2 rises. So PP gets steeper as we move down it to the right.2. The marginal product of labor curves corresponding to the production functions in problem2 are as follows:a. Suppose that the price of good 2 relative to that of good 1 is 2. Determinegraphically the wage rate and the allocation of labor between the twosectors.With the assumption that labor is freely mobile between sectors, it willmove from the low-wage sector to the high-wage sector until wages areequalized. So in equilibrium, the wage rate is equal to the value of labor ’smarginal product.2/122211=⨯=⨯P P P MPL P MPL Q 1Q 2L 1 L 2 PPF ),(2222L K Q Q =),(1111L K Q Q =100100The abscissa of point of intersection illustrated above should be between(20, 30). Since we only have to find out the approximate answer, linearfunction could be employed.The labor allocation between the sectors is approximately L 1=27 and L 2=73.The wage rate is approximately 0.98.b. Using the graph drawn for problem 2, determine the output of each sector.Then confirm graphically that the slop of the production possibilityfrontier at that point equals the relative price.The relative price is P 2/P 1=2 and we have got the approximate labor allocation,so we can employ the linear function again to calculate the approximateoutput of each sector: Q 1=44 and Q 2=90.c. Suppose that the relative price of good 2 falls to 1. Repeat (a) and (b). Q 1 Q 2L 1 L 2PPF),(2222L K Q Q =),(1111L K Q Q =10010021-=slopeThe relative decline in the price of good 2 caused labor to be reallocated:labor is drawn out of production of good 2 and enters production of good 1(Ｌ1=62, L 2=38). This also leads to an output adjustment, that is, productionof good 2 falls to 68 units and production of good 1 rises to 76 units. Andthe wage rate is approximately equal to 0.74.d. Calculate the effects of the price change on the income of the specificfactors in sectors 1 and 2.With the relative price change from P 2/P 1=2 to P 2/P 1=1, the price of good 2has fallen by 50 percent, while the price of good 1 has stayed the same.Wages have fallen too, but by less than the fall in P 2 (wages fellapproximately 25 percent). Thus, the real wage relative to P 2 actually riseswhile real wage relative to P 1 falls. Hence, to determine the welfareconsequence for workers, the information about their consumption shares ofgood 1 and good 2 is needed. Q 1 Q 2L 1 L 2PPF),(2222L K Q Q =),(1111L K Q Q =1001001-=slope 21-=slope3. In the text we examined the impacts of increases in the supply of capital andland. But what if the mobile factor, labor, increases in supply?a ． Analyze the qualitative effects of an increase in the supply of labor inthe specific factors model, holding the price of both goods constant.For an economy producing two goods, X an Y, with labor demands reflected bytheir marginal revenue product curves, there is an initial wage of w 1 andan initial labor allocation of L x =O x A and L y =O y A. When the supply of laborincreases, the right boundary of the diagram illustrated below pushed outto O y ’. The demand for labor in sector Y is pulled rightward with the boundary.The new intersection of the labor demand curves shows that labor expands inboth sectors, and therefore output of both X and Y also expand. The relativeexpansion of output is ambiguous. Wages paid to workers fall.b ． Graph the effect on the equilibrium for the numerical example in problems2 and 3, given a relative price of 1, when the labor force expands from 100to 140.With the law of diminishing returns, the new production possibility frontieris more concave and steeper (flatter) at the ends when total labor supplyincreases.L 1 increase to 90 from 62 and L 2 increases to 50 from 38. Wages decline from0.74 to 0.60. This new allocation of labor leads to a new output mix ofapproximately Q 1=85 and Q 2=77.1w 2w y O yChapter 41． In the United States where land is cheap, the ratio of land to labor used incattle rising is higher than that of land used in wheat growing. But in more crowded countries, where land is expensive and labor is cheap, it is common to raise cows by using less land and more labor than Americans use to grow wheat. Can we still say that raising cattle is land intensive compared with farming wheat? Why or why not?The definition of cattle growing as land intensive depends on the ratio of landto labor used in production, not on the ratio of land or labor to output. The ratio of land to labor in cattle exceeds the ratio in wheat in the United States, implying cattle is land intensive in the United States. Cattle is land intensive in other countries too if the ratio of land to labor in cattle production exceeds the ratio in wheat production in that country. The comparison between another country and the United States is less relevant for answering the question.2． Suppose that at current factor prices cloth is produced using 20 hours of laborfor each acre of land, and food is produced using only 5 hours of labor per acre of land.a. Suppose that the economy ’s total resources are 600 hours of labor and 60acres of land. Using a diagram determine the allocation of resources.5TF LF /TF LF /QF)(TF / /QF)(LF aTF / aLF 20TC LC /TC LC /QC)(TC / /QC)(LC aTC / aLC =⇒===⇒==We can solve this algebraically since L=LC+LF=600 and T=TC+TF=60. The solution is LC=400, TC=20, LF=200 and TF=40.b. Now suppose that the labor supply increase first to 800, then 1000, then1200 hours. Using a diagram like Figure4-6, trace out the changingallocation of resources.tion).specializa (complete 0.LF 0,TF 1200,LC 60,TC :1200L 66.67LF 13.33,TF 933.33,LC 46.67,TC :1000L 133.33LF 26.67,TF 666.67,LC 33.33,TC :800L ===============c. What would happen if the labor supply were to increase even further?At constant factor prices, some labor would be unused, so factor prices wouldhave to change, or there would be unemployment.3. “The world ’s poorest countries cannot find anything to export. There is no Labor Land ClothFood 0l 800 0l 1000 0l 1200 Labor Land ClothFoodLC LF TCTFresource that is abundant — certainly not capital or land, and in small poor nations not even labor is abundant.” Discuss.The gains from trade depend on comparative rather than absolute advantage. As to poor countries, what matters is not the absolute abundance of factors, but their relative abundance. Poor countries have an abundance of labor relative to capital when compared to more developed countries.4.The U.S. labor movement —which mostly represents blue-collar workers ratherthan professionals and highly educated workers — has traditionally favored limits on imports form less-affluent countries. Is this a shortsighted policy of a rational one in view of the interests of union members? How does the answer depend on the model of trade?In the Ricardo’s model, labor gains from trade through an increase in its purchasing power. This result does not support labor union demands for limits on imports from less affluent countries.In the Immobile Factors model labor may gain or lose from trade. Purchasing power in terms of one good will rise, but in terms of the other good it will decline.The Heckscher-Ohlin model directly discusses distribution by considering the effects of trade on the owners of factors of production. In the context of this model, unskilled U.S. labor loses from trade since this group represents the relatively scarce factors in this country. The results from the Heckscher-Ohlin model support labor union demands for import limits.5.There is substantial inequality of wage levels between regions within the UnitedStates. For example, wages of manufacturing workers in equivalent jobs are about20 percent lower in the Southeast than they are in the Far West. Which of theexplanations of failure of factor price equalization might account for this?How is this case different from the divergence of wages between the United States and Mexico (which is geographically closer to both the U.S. Southeast and the Far West than the Southeast and Far West are to each other)?When we employ factor price equalization, we should pay attention to its conditions: both countries/regions produce both goods; both countries have the same technology of production, and the absence of barriers to trade. Inequality of wage levels between regions within the United States may caused by some or all of these reasons.Actually, the barriers to trade always exist in the real world due to transportation costs. And the trade between U.S. and Mexico, by contrast, is subject to legal limits; together with cultural differences that inhibit the flow of technology, this may explain why the difference in wage rates is so much larger.6.Explain why the Leontief paradox and the more recent Bowen, Leamer, andSveikauskas results reported in the text contradict the factor-proportions theory.The factor proportions theory states that countries export those goods whose production is intensive in factors with which they are abundantly endowed. One would expect the United States, which has a high capital/labor ratio relativeto the rest of the world, to export capital-intensive goods if the Heckscher-Ohlin theory holds. Leontief found that the United States exported labor-intensive goods. Bowen, Leamer and Sveikauskas found that the correlation between factor endowment and trade patterns is weak for the world as a whole.The data do not support the predictions of the theory that countries' exports and imports reflect the relative endowments of factors.7.In the discussion of empirical results on the Heckscher-Ohlin model, we notedthat recent work suggests that the efficiency of factors of production seems to differ internationally. Explain how this would affect the concept of factor price equalization.If the efficiency of the factors of production differs internationally, the lessons of the Heckscher-Ohlin theory would be applied to “effective factors”which adjust for the differences in technology or worker skills or land quality (for example). The adjusted model has been found to be more successful than the unadjusted model at explaining the pattern of trade between countries.Factor-price equalization concepts would apply to the effective factors. A worker with more skills or in a country with better technology could be considered to be equal to two workers in another country. Thus, the single person would be two effective units of labor. Thus, the one high-skilled worker could earn twice what lower skilled workers do and the price of one effective unit of labor would still be equalized.欢迎您的下载，资料仅供参考！致力为企业和个人提供合同协议，策划案计划书，学习资料等等打造全网一站式需求。
克鲁格曼《国际经济学》(国际金融)习题答案要点
克鲁格曼《国际经济学》(国际金融)习题答案要点赤字。
因此，1982-1985年美国资本流入超过了其经常项目的赤字。
第13章 汇率与外汇市场：资产方法 1、汇率为每欧元1.5美元时，一条德国香肠bratwurst 等于三条hot dog 。
其他不变时，当美元升值至1.25$per Euro, 一条德国香肠bratwurst 等价于2.5个hot dog 。
相对于初始阶段，hot dog 变得更贵。
2、63、25%；20%；2%。
4、分别为：15%、10%、-8%。
5、（1）由于利率相等，根据利率平价条件，美元对英镑的预期贬值率为零，即当前汇率与预期汇率相等。
（2）1.579$per pound6、如果美元利率不久将会下调，市场会形成美元贬值的预期，即e E 值变大，从而使欧元存款的美元预期收益率增加，图13-1中的曲线I 移到I '，导致美元对欧元贬值，汇率从0E 升高到1E 。
131-图 7、（1）如图13-2，当欧元利率从0i 提高到1i 时，汇率从0E 调整到1E ，欧元相对于美元升值。
I 'IE 1E $/euroE图13-2（2）如图13-3，当欧元对美元预期升值时，美元存款的欧元预期收益率提高，美元存款的欧元收益曲线从I '上升到I ，欧元对美元的汇率从E '提高到E ，欧元对美元贬值。
133-图8、(a)如果美联储降低利率，在预期不变的情况下，根据利率平价条件，美元将贬值。
如图13-4，利率从i 下降到i ' ，美元对外国货币的汇价从E 提高到E '，美元贬值。
如果软着陆，并且美联储没有降低利率，则美元不会贬值。
即使美联储稍微降低利率，假如从i 降低到*i （如图13-5），这比人们开始相信会发生的还要小。
同时，由于软着陆所产生的乐观因素，使美元预期升值，即e E 值变小，使国外资产的美元预期收益率降低（曲线I 向下移动到I '），曲线移动反映了对美国软着陆引起的乐观预期，同时由乐观因素引起的预期表明：在没有预期变化的情况下，由利I 'E E 'euro/$E IiE 1E euro/$E rate of return(in euro)0i 1i率i 下降到*i 引起美元贬值程度（从E 贬值到*E ）将大于存在预期变化引起的美元贬值程度（从E 到E ''）。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
Chapter 21．Home has 1200 units of labor available. It can produce two goods, apples and bananas. The unit labor requirement in apple production is 3, while in banana production it is 2. a ．Graph out the production possibilities frontier:b ．What is the opportunity cost of apples in terms of bananas?5.1=LbLa a a c ．In the absence of trade, what would the price of apples in terms of bananas be?In the absence of trade, since labor is the only factor of production and supply decisions aredetermined by the attempts of individuals tomaximize their earnings in a competitive economy, only when Lb La b a /a a /P P =will both goods be produced. So 1.5 /P P b a =2．Home is as described in problem 1. There is now also another country, Foreign, with alabor force of 800. Foreign’s unit labor requirement in apple production is 5, while in banana production it is 1.a ．Graph Foreign’s production possibilities frontier:b ．3．Now suppose world relative demand takes the following form: Demand for apples/demand for bananas = price of bananas/price of apples.a ．Graph the relative demand curve along with the relative supply curve:a b b a /P P /D D =∵When the market achieves its equilibrium, we have 1b a )(D D -**=++=ba b b a a P P Q Q Q Q ∴RD is a hyperbola xy 1=b ．What is the equilibrium relative price of apples?The equilibrium relative price of apples is determined by the intersection of the RD and RScurves.RD: yx 1= RS: 5]5,5.1[5.1],5.0(5.0)5.0,0[=∈=⎪⎩⎪⎨⎧+∞∈=∈y y y x x x ∴25.0==y x∴2/=b P a P e ec ．Describe the pattern of trade.∵b a b e a e b a P P P P P P ///>>**∴In this two-country world, Home will specialize in the apple production, export apples and import bananas. Foreign will specialize in the banana production, export bananas and import apples.d ．Show that both Home and Foreign gain from trade.International trade allows Home and Foreign to consume anywhere within the coloredlines, which lie outside the countries’ production possibility frontiers. And the indirect method, specializing in producing only one production then trade with other country, is a more efficient method than direct production. In the absence of trade, Home could gain three bananas by foregoing two apples, and Foreign could gain by one foregoing five bananas. Trade allows each country to trade two bananas for one apple. Home could then gain four bananas by foregoing two apples while Foreign could gain one apple by foregoing only two bananas. So both Home and Foreign gain from trade.4．Suppose that instead of 1200 workers, Home had 2400. Find the equilibrium relative price. What can you say about the efficiency of world production and the division of the gains from trade between Home and Foreign in this case? RD: yx 1= RS: 5]5,5.1[5.1],1(1)1,0[=∈=⎪⎩⎪⎨⎧+∞∈=∈y y y x x x ∴5.132==y x∴5.1/=b P a P e eIn this case, Foreign will specialize in the banana production, export bananas and import apples. But Home will produce bananas and apples at the same time. And the opportunity cost of bananas in terms of apples for Home remains the same. So Home neither gains nor loses but Foreign gains from trade.5．Suppose that Home has 2400 workers, but they are only half as production in both industries as we have been assuming, Construct the world relative supply curve and determine the equilibrium relative price. How do the gains from trade compare with those in the case described in problem 4?In this case, the labor is doubled while the productivity of labor is halved, so the ＂effective labor＂remains the same. So the answer is similar to that in 3. And both Home and Foreign can gain from trade. But Foreign gains lesser compare with that in the case 4.6．”Korean workers earn only $2.50 an hour; if we allow Korea to export as m uch as it likes to the United States, our workers will be forced down to the same level. Y ou can’t import a $5 shirt without importing the $2.50 wage that goes with it.” Discuss.In fact, relative wage rate is determined by comparative productivity and the relative demand for goods. Korea’s low wage reflects the fact that Korea is less productive than the United States in most industries. Actually, trade with a less productive, low wage country can raise the welfare and standard of living of countries with high productivity, such as United States. Sothis pauper labor argument is wrong.7．Japanese labor productivity is roughly the same as that of the United States in the manufacturing sector (higher in some industries, lower in others), while the United States, is still considerably more productive in the service sector. But most services are non-traded. Some analysts have argued that this poses a problem for the United States, because our comparative advantage lies in things we cannot sell on world markets. What is wrong with this argument?The competitive advantage of any industry depends on both the relative productivities of the industries and the relative wages across industries. So there are four aspects should be taken into account before we reach conclusion: both the industries and service sectors of Japan and U.S., not just the two service sectors. So this statement does not bade on the reasonable logic. 8．Anyone who has visited Japan knows it is an incredibly expensive place; although Japanese workers earn about the same as their U.S. counterparts, the purchasing power of their incomes is about one-third less. Extend your discussing from question 7 to explain this observation. (Hint: Think about wages and the implied prices of non-trade goods.) The relative higher purchasing power of U.S. is sustained and maintained by its considerably higher productivity in services. Because most of those services are non-traded, Japanese could not benefit from those lower service costs. And U.S. does not have to face a lower international price of services. So the purchasing power of Japanese is just one-third of their U.S. counterparts.9．How does the fact that many goods are non-traded affect the extent of possible gains from trade?Actually the gains from trade depended on the proportion of non-traded goods. The gains will increase as the proportion of non-traded goods decrease.10．We have focused on the case of trade involving only two countries. Suppose that there are many countries capable of producing two goods, and that each country has only one factor of production, labor. What could we say about the pattern of production and in this case? (Hint: Try constructing the world relative supply curve.)Any countries to the left of the intersection of the relative demand and relative supply curves export the good in which they have a comparative advantage relative to any country to the right of the intersection. If the intersection occurs in a horizontal portion then the country with that price ratio produces both goods.。