Motivation A Figure 1 Figure 2 Table 1 Table 2

Similar documents
Internation1al Trade

Addendum to: New Trade Models, Same Old Gains?

Melitz, M. J. & G. I. P. Ottaviano. Peter Eppinger. July 22, 2011

Melitz, M. J. & G. I. P. Ottaviano. Peter Eppinger. July 22, 2011

CEMMAP Masterclass: Empirical Models of Comparative Advantage and the Gains from Trade 1 Lecture 3: Gravity Models

International Trade Lecture 16: Gravity Models (Theory)

Lecture 1: Ricardian Theory of Trade

Comparative Advantage and Heterogeneous Firms

Interest Rate Liberalization and Capital Misallocation 1

Productivity Improvements and Falling Trade Costs: Boon or Bane?

New Trade Models, Same Old Gains?

Firms, Contracts, and Trade Structure: Slides

Firms, Contracts, and Trade Structure: Slides

Internationa1 l Trade

MIT PhD International Trade Lecture 15: Gravity Models (Theory)

Trade, Neoclassical Growth and Heterogeneous Firms

Cross-Country Differences in Productivity: The Role of Allocation and Selection

Dynamics of Firms and Trade in General Equilibrium. Robert Dekle, Hyeok Jeong and Nobuhiro Kiyotaki USC, Seoul National University and Princeton

EU harmonization of regulations, competition and rm-level productivity growth in the Dutch food industry

Innovation, Firm Dynamics, and International Trade

Trade policy III: Export subsidies

Addendum to: International Trade, Technology, and the Skill Premium

NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES NEW TRADE MODELS, SAME OLD GAINS? Costas Arkolakis Arnaud Costinot Andrés Rodríguez-Clare

Trade, Firm Selection, and Innovation: the Competition Channel

Measuring the Gains from Trade: They are Large!

Imported Inputs and the Gains from Trade

The Ramsey Model. (Lecture Note, Advanced Macroeconomics, Thomas Steger, SS 2013)

External Economies of Scale and International Trade: Further Analysis

Market Power. Economics II: Microeconomics. December Aslanyan (VŠE) Oligopoly 12/09 1 / 39

Trade Policies, Firm Heterogeneity, and Variable Markups

International Trade Lecture 3: Ricardian Theory (II)

Global Value Chain Participation and Current Account Imbalances

Imported Intermediate Goods and Product Innovation: Evidence from India

Internation1al Trade

THE GAINS FROM INPUT TRADE WITH HETEROGENEOUS IMPORTERS

EconS Cost Structures

Growth, Trade, and Inequality

Estimating the Productivity Gains from Importing [Preliminary - Comments welcome]

Lecture #11: Introduction to the New Empirical Industrial Organization (NEIO) -

Interest-Rate Liberalization and Capital Misallocations

Class Notes on New Economic Geography Models

The Gains From Input Trade in Firm-Based Models of Importing

Web Appendix for Heterogeneous Firms and Trade (Not for Publication)

(a) Write down the Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman (HJB) Equation in the dynamic programming

Trade and Domestic Policy in Models with Monopolistic Competition

Modeling Technological Change

Multiple-Quality Cournot Oligopoly and the Role of Market Size

The State and China s Productivity Deceleration: Firm-level Evidence

Firms and returns to scale -1- John Riley

Schumpeterian Growth Models

The Impact of Trade Liberalization on Industrial Productivity

Advanced Economic Growth: Lecture 3, Review of Endogenous Growth: Schumpeterian Models

UCD CENTRE FOR ECONOMIC RESEARCH WORKING PAPER SERIES

Misallocation Under Trade Liberalization

Welfare in the Eaton-Kortum Model of International Trade

Non-Homothetic Gravity

INTEREST-RATE LIBERALIZATION AND CAPITAL MISALLOCATIONS. I. Introduction

Advanced Economic Growth: Lecture 8, Technology Di usion, Trade and Interdependencies: Di usion of Technology

International Prices and Exchange Rates Econ 2530b, Gita Gopinath

The Variety E ect of Trade Liberalization

problem. max Both k (0) and h (0) are given at time 0. (a) Write down the Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman (HJB) Equation in the dynamic programming

EconS Vertical Integration

Advanced Microeconomics

Heterogeneous Mark-Ups and Endogenous Misallocation

Answer Key: Problem Set 3

Trade Liberalization and Pollution in Melitz-Ottaviano Model

Taxes and Entry Mode Decision in Multinationals: Export and FDI with and without Decentralization

Firms and returns to scale -1- Firms and returns to scale

Equilibrium Conditions (symmetric across all differentiated goods)

Monopolistic Competition Model with Endogeneous Investments: the case of Closed Economy

Solow Growth Model. Michael Bar. February 28, Introduction Some facts about modern growth Questions... 4

Economic Growth: Lecture 8, Overlapping Generations

Modeling firms locational choice

Market Structure, Factor Endowment and Technology Adoption

The Elusive Pro-Competitive Effects of Trade

Structural Change, Demographic Transition and Fertility Di erence

Imperfect Competition and Misallocations

Trade Policies, Firm Heterogeneity, and Variable Markups

International Trade 31E00500

Volume and Share Quotas in Oligopoly

Trade Models with Heterogeneous Firms: What About Importing?

The Impact of Trade on Organization and Productivity

Labor Market Structure and Oshoring

Advanced Economic Growth: Lecture 2, Review of Endogenous Growth: Expanding Variety Models

International Trade Lecture 9: Factor Proportion Theory (II)

Bertrand Model of Price Competition. Advanced Microeconomic Theory 1

Competitive Equilibrium and the Welfare Theorems

Research and Development

Macroeconomics IV Problem Set I

International Trade. Course Description and Requirements

Lecture 2: Firms, Jobs and Policy

Key sectors for economic development: A perspective from inter-sectoral linkages and cross-sector misallocation

A Two-Country Case: Eaton-Kortum Model with General Equilibrium Technology Changes and International Trade

Analysis of a two country version of Eaton-Kortum Model of trade

Economic Growth: Lectures 10 and 11, Endogenous Technological Change

AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS STAFF PAPER SERIES

Globalization and the Gains from Variety (QJE 2006)

Knowledge licensing in a Model of R&D-driven Endogenous Growth

NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES GROWTH, TRADE, AND INEQUALITY. Gene M. Grossman Elhanan Helpman. Working Paper

On the Geography of Global Value Chains

Transcription:

Future Work Motivation A Figure 1 Figure 2 Table 1 Table 2 Motivation B Markup Di erences: SOEs vs. POEs Markup Di erences Across Sectors Sectoral Di erences Motivation Key Novelty Model

Trade Liberalization, Input-output Linkage and Markup (very preliminary) Yong Wang and Wei Xiang Peking University yongwang@nsd.pku.edu.cn; xiangwei@pku.edu.cn August 4, 2017

Figure 1

Figure 2 Data Source: Chinese rm-level data from China s National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) 2000-2007. Calculated by the authors.

Table 1

Table 2

Figure 1 in Li, Liu and Wang (2016)

Figure 3 in Li, Liu and Wang (2016)

Table 2 in Li, Liu and Wang (2016)

Li, Liu and Wang (2016) A Model of China s State Capitalism (Li, Liu and Wang 2016) To show how SOEs in upstream sectors extract monopoly rents from downstream liberalized sectors in the process of structural transformation (industrialization) and trade globalization. key insights: vertical structure di ers from horizontal structure (Hsieh and Klenow 2009, Restuccia and Rogerson 2008) Limitations: downstream aggregate productivity is exogenous identical markup across downstream rms (because homogeneous productivities) constant upstream markup when downstream production functions are Cobb-Douglas upstream is not traded.

Novelty of This Paper By embedding Melitz and Ottaviano (2008) into the downstream sector of Li, Liu and Wang (2016), we explore how important rm heterogeneity is for markups in upstream and downstream rms, welfare, structural transformation, and GDP in both autarky and trade environment: add sectoral linkage with asymmetric market structures to Melitz and Ottaviano (2008) oligopoly in the upstream sector upstream goods are also tradable endogenous and heterogeneous markups more general, not speci c to China or SOEs Quantitative (in progress): to test the model predictions about the impact of trade liberalization with input-output linkages and asymmetric market structures counterfactual analyses

Model Environment Two countries: H and F. L (L ) identical households, each endowed with one unit of labor inelastically supplied Three sectors: agriculture q 0, non-agriculture (upstream sector m and downstream sector i 2 ) Firm Heterogeneity: Melitz and Ottaviano (2008) Vertical Structure: Li, Liu and Wang (2016)

Preference Z U = q0 c + qi c di i2 Z 1 2 (qi c ) 2 di i2 Z 1 2 ( qi c di) 2 i2 q0 c and qc i denote the consumption levels of the agriculture good and each variety i 2. and govern the substitution pattern between Q c R i2 qc i di and the numeraire. governs the degree of di erentiation across the varieties.

Demand The inverse demand function for variety i 2 by one household: p i = q c i Q c Domestic market demand for variety i : where q i Lq c i = L N + L p i + L N N + p; 8i 2 s ; N is the total measure of consumed varieties: s fi jqi c > 0; i 2 g p (1=N) R i2 p s i di p i p max 1 ( + N p) N +

Technology The production function for a nal good (variety) is given by: q('; l; m) = '( l l ) l ( m m ) m ; l + m = 1: (1) where ' is the productivity drawn from distribution G('). The production function of the intermediate good m by an upstream rm is: q m ( m ; l m ) = m l m ; (2) where productivity m is exogenously given. The production function of the agriculture good q 0 is q 0 = l 0.

Market Structure Labor market and the agriculture market are both perfectly competitive. Each downstream rm produces a di erent variety i 2, engaged in monopolistic competition. (Homogeneous) input m is produced by M rms with Cournot competition.

Timing 1. All the upstream rms perfectly foresee the aggregate demand function for good m and are engaged in Cournot competition. 2. Then the price of the intermediate good p m and the total supply Q s m are realized and become publicly observable. 3. Each dowstream rm takes p m as given when making decisions on entry, exit, output and price. 4. The realized aggregate demand for m from the downstream industry Q d m is equal to Q s m at price p m.

Cost Function The cost function of a downstream rm with productivity ': c('; q; w; p m ) = w lp m m q(') ' Whenever the agriculture (numeraire) output q 0 > 0, we have w = 1 and c('; q; p m ) = pm m ' q(') mc D (') = pm m ' mc X (') = pm m ' is the iceberg trade cost imposed by foreign country.

Intermediate Good By Shepard Lemma, the demand for m from a downstream rm with productivity ': and its demand for labor: m(') = m ' p l m q(') l(') = l ' pm m q(') The supplies by a rm with productivity ' at the domestic and foreign markets: q D (') = L [p D(') mc D (')] q X (') = L [p X(') mc X (')]

Cut- o Productivity The cut-o productivities of the domestic and exporting rms are: ' D = inff' : D (') > 0g = (p m) m p max ; ' X = inff' : X (') > 0g = (p m) m : p max

De ne rm markup p (')=mc (') Firm pro t after paying xed cost f E is given by (') = q (') [p (') mc (')]

prices Equilibrium p D (') = (p m) m ( 1 + 1 2 ' D ' ); p X(') = (p m) m 2 output q D (') = L(p m) m ( 1 1 2 ' D markups pro ts ' ); q X(') = L (p m ) m 2 D (') = ' 2 ( 1 ' D ) + 1 2 ; X(') = ' 2 ( 1 ' X ) + 1 2 ; ( 1 X + 1 ' ); ( 1 ' X 1 ' ); D (') = p m 2m 4 ( 1 1 ' D ' )2 L; X (') = p 2 m m 4 ( 1 1 ' X ' )2 L 2 :

Free entry implies Z 1 Free Entry Condition ' D D (')dg(') + Assume Pareto distribution: G(') = 1 Z 1 ' X X (')dg(') = f E ( ' min ' )k ; g(') = k(' min ) k ' (k+1) : The cut-o productivities of the rms in H: where ' D = 1 L [ (p m ) 2m (p m) 2m ] 1 k+2 ' X = 1 L [ (p m) 2m (p m ) 2m ] 1 k+2 k ; k ; 2(k + 1)(k + 2)f E ' k : min

Cut-o Productivities The cut-o productivities when F and H are symmetric: ' D = [ ' X = [ The measure of total entering rms: L(1 + )p2m m ] 1 k+2 ; L(1 + )p2m m ] 1 k+2 ; N E = 2(k + 1) (1 + )' k min [ 'k+1 D p m m ' k D p m m ]

Cut-o Productivities From the free entry condition, we have: Lp 2m m (' ' D = [ min ) k ] 1=(k+2) (3) 2(k + 1)(k + 2)f E The total measure of the varieties is: N = N E (1 G(' D )) + N E (1 G(' X )) (4) 2(k + 1) ' = D p m m (5) p m m

Demand and Supply of the Intermediate Good where Q d m = p2m=(k+2) m p m+1 m p m m (6) = 2k(k + 1) 1 + 2+ 1 k m kf E (1 + ) 2 ; (1 + )L(' = [ min ) k ] 1=(k+2) : 2(k + 1)(k + 2)f E Q s k m(p m ) = Mf [ k + 2 m + 1]p k k+2 m 2 m p 2 1 m g(p m )

Equilibrium Characterization Lemma There exists a unique equilibrium.

Equilibrium Characterization Theorem Trade liberalization in the downstream sector lowers average markups of the downstream rms but raises markups of the upstream rms when M = 1.

Equilibrium Characterization Theorem Trade liberalization of the intermediate good leads to higher average markups of the downstream rms producing nal goods and lower markups of the upstream rms.

Future Work Optimal rm number in the upstream. Empirical Test. Data: ASIF and Custom Data The index of upstremness: Antras and Chor (Econometrica 2013) The estimation of markup: De Loecker and Warzynski(AER 2012); De Loecker et al.(econometrica 2016) The estimation of TFP: augmented Olley-Pakes TFP(Olley and Pakes Econometrica 1996; Amiti and Konings AER 2007; Yu EJ 2015).