Strategic Technology Investments in Open Economies

We study a general equilibrium model of international trade with heterogeneous firms, where countries can strategically invest in technology. The countries' motive is to improve firms' productivity, leading to a competitive advantage in international trade. We are interested in how trade liberalization affects this governmental incentive to invest in technology. In the closed economy countries invest if consumers have a sufficiently high preference for varieties. In the open economy we analyze the Nash-equilibrium policy and the cooperative policy. If there are no cross-country investment spillovers, countries strategically compete in their investment levels and increase their investments with higher trade openness. From a social perspective we have an overinvestment problem. If there are cross-country investment spillovers, we differentiate between weak and strong spillovers. In both cases the cooperative solution predicts a positive relationship between investments and trade openness. If there are weak (strong) spillovers, we find a positive (hump-shaped) relationship between technology investments and trade openness in the Nash-equilibrium. From a social perspective we obtain an over (under)-investment problem if spillovers are weak (strong).

[1]  K. Behrens,et al.  Trade, Wages, and Productivity , 2012 .

[2]  Giordano Mion,et al.  Productivity and Firm Selection: Quantifying the ‘New’ Gains from Trade , 2012 .

[3]  A. Rodrı́guez-Clare,et al.  Trade Policy Under Firm-Level Heterogeneity in a Small Economy , 2007 .

[4]  E. Helpman,et al.  Estimating Trade Flows: Trading Partners and Trading Volumes , 2007 .

[5]  S. Demidova.  Productivity Improvements and Falling Trade Costs: Boon or Bane? , 2006 .

[6]  G. Ottaviano,et al.  Market Size, Trade, and Productivity , 2005, World Scientific Studies in International Economics.

[7]  J. Eaton,et al.  Plants and Productivity in International Trade , 2000 .

[8]  A. Bernard,et al.  Exceptional Exporter Performance: Cause, Effect, or Both? , 1997 .

[9]  A. Jaffe,et al.  Evidence from Patents and Patent Citations on the Impact of Nasa and Other Federal Labs on Commercial Innovation , 1997 .

[10]  Lee G. Branstetter.  Are knowledge spillovers international or intranational in scope? ☆: Microeconometric evidence from the U.S. and Japan , 2001 .

[11]  J. Brander,et al.  Strategic Trade Policy , 1995 .

[12]  Hugo Hopenhayn.  Entry, exit, and firm dynamics in long run equilibrium , 1992 .

[13]  James D. Adams,et al.  Fundamental Stocks of Knowledge and Productivity Growth , 1990, Journal of Political Economy.

[14]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D , 1989 .

[15]  Jens Suedekum,et al.  Subsidizing Firm Entry in Open Economies , 2009, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[16]  D. Greenaway,et al.  Intra-industry Trade Between Asymmetric Countries with Heterogeneous Firms , 2004 .

[17]  Sukkyun Chung,et al.  Productivity and Turnover in the Export Market: Micro-level Evidence from the Republic of Korea and Taiwan (China) , 2000 .

[18]  Saul Lach,et al.  Is "Learning-by-Exporting" Important? Micro-dynamic Evidence from Colombia, Mexico, and Morocco , 1996 .

[19]  M. Spence.  Cost Reduction, Competition and Industry Performance , 1984 .

[20]  P. Krugman.  Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the Pattern of Trade , 1980 .

[21]  Ronald B. Davies,et al.  Institute for International Integration Studies Tax Competition for Heterogeneous Firms with Endogenous Entry Tax Competition for Heterogeneous Firms with Endogenous Entry † , 2022 .