Search results

We develop a 2×2×2 model of international trade in which one of the sectors is oligopolistic. The oligopolistic sector consists of a given number of a priori identical firms belonging to one of the two countries, but some deciding to locate in the other country so as to realize higher profits. If a firm locates in the foreign country, its technological capability is assumed to go down due to the alien environment. In this framework we examine the effect of the environment on the level of foreign direct investment and on factor prices in the two countries.

Using a two-country two-commodity dynamic optimization model that gives rise to a liquidity trap, this paper investigates the effect of an international transfer on consumption and employment in the donor and recipient countries. It shows that a transfer from a country with unemployment to a country with full employment raises both countries' consumption. It deteriorates the donor's current account and hence depreciates its currency, which improves the international competitiveness of its products. Thus, employment and consumption increases in the country. It in turn improves the terms of trade for the recipient country, which benefits it since it maintains full employment.

The importance of foreign aid cannot be overstated.¹ Unprecedented integration of the world economy in recent years has brought the issue of poverty back in the policy debate at the international level. Some of the recent initiatives such as the United Nation's Millennium Development Goals and the report by the Africa Commission (set up by the British Prime Minister Tony Blair) which was discussed at length at G8 meetings, recognize this fact. The analysis of foreign aid is however fraught with controversies and paradoxes. This applies to both the theoretical and the empirical literature. There are two broad strands in the literature. First, in international trade theory, researchers have examined the welfare effects of foreign aid and, in particular, if aid can be donor-enriching and recipient-immiserizing – the so-called Transfer Paradox.² The main mechanism here is via changes in the international terms of trade. The primary benefit (loss) to the recipient (donor) can be offset by a secondary loss (gain) because of deterioration (improvement) in the international terms of trade. More recently, a number of studies have examined the possibility of strictly Pareto improving foreign aid, i.e., situations where both the donor and the recipient are better off as a result of the transfer.