Instruct: Given a question, retrieve documents that answer the question.
Query: When was the Heckscher–Ohlin model developed?
Bertil Ohlin first explained the theory in a book published in 1933. Ohlin wrote the book alone, but he credited Heckscher as co-developer of the model because of his earlier work on the problem, and because many of the ideas in the final model came from Ohlin's doctoral thesis, supervised by Heckscher.
Notable contributions came from Paul Samuelson, Ronald Jones, and Jaroslav Vanek, so that variations of the model are sometimes called the Heckscher-Ohlin-Samuelson model or the Heckscher-Ohlin-Vanek model in the neo-classical economics.
A common understanding exists that in the national level HOV model fits well. In fact, Davis and others found that HOV model fitted extremely well with the regional data of Japan.[6] Even when the HOV formula fits well, it does not mean that Heckscher–Ohlin theory is valid. Indeed, Heckscher–Ohlin theory claims that the state of factor endowments of each country (or each region) determines the production of each country (respectively of each region) but Bernstein and Weinstein found that the factor endowments have little predictive power. The factor-endowments-driven model (FED model) has errors much greater than the HOV model.[7]
As capital controls are reduced, the modern world has begun to look a lot less like the world modelled by Heckscher and Ohlin. It has been argued that capital mobility undermines the case for free trade itself, see: Capital mobility and comparative advantage Free trade critique.
The original Heckscher–Ohlin model and extended model such as the Vanek model performs poorly, as it is shown in the section "Econometric testing of H–O model theorems". Daniel Trefler and Susan Chun Zhu summarizes their paper that "It is hard to believe that factor endowments theory [editor's note: in other words, Heckscher–Ohlin–Vanek Model] could offer an adequate explanation of international trade patterns".[5]
Heckscher and Ohlin considered the Factor-Price Equalization theorem an econometric success because the large volume of international trade in the late 19th and early 20th centuries coincided with the convergence of commodity and factor prices worldwide.
Usually by a system of prices. But prices depend on profit rate. In the Heckscher–Ohlin model, the rate of profit is determined according to how abundant capital is. If capital is scarce, it has a high rate of profit. If it is abundant, the profit rate is low. Here is a logical circle. Before the profit rate is determined, the amount of capital is not measured. This logical difficulty was the subject of academic controversy many years ago—sometimes called the Cambridge Capital Controversies. The conclusion of the controversies was that the concept of homogeneous capital was untenable. Heckscher–Ohlin theorists ignore all these stories without providing any explanation how capital is measured theoretically.[13]
In 1933 Ohlin and Heckscher proposed the Heckscher-Ohlin Model of International Trade, which claims that countries will export products that use their abundant and cheap factors of production and import products that use their scarce factors of production. In 1977 Ohlin was awarded a share of the Nobel Economics Prize.
The Heckscher–Ohlin model (H–O model) is a general equilibrium mathematical model of international trade, developed by Eli Heckscher and Bertil Ohlin at the Stockholm School of Economics. It builds on David Ricardo's theory of comparative advantage by predicting patterns of commerce and production based on the factor endowments of a trading region. The model essentially says that countries export products that use their abundant and cheap factors of production, and import products that use the countries' scarce factors.[1]
Yet, Donald Davis believed that both the Heckscher–Ohlin and Ricardian models were still relevant in explaining intra-industry trade. He developed the Heckscher-Ohlin-Ricardo model, which showed that even with constant returns to scale that intra-industry trade could still occur under the traditional setting. The Heckscher-Ohlin-Ricardo model explained that countries of identical factor endowments would still trade due to differences in technology, as this would encourage specialisation and therefore trade, in exactly the same matter that was set out in the Ricardian model.
However, if labor is separated into two distinct factors, skilled labor and unskilled labor, the Heckscher–Ohlin theorem is more accurate. The U.S. tends to export skilled-labor-intensive goods, and tends to import unskilled-labor-intensive goods.[10]
The Heckscher–Ohlin theorem is one of the four critical theorems of the Heckscher–Ohlin model, developed by Swedish economist Eli Heckscher and Bertil Ohlin (his student). In the two-factor case, it states: "A capital-abundant country will export the capital-intensive good, while the labor-abundant country will export the labor-intensive good."
Various attempts in the 1960s and 1970s have been made to "solve" the Leontief paradox and save the Heckscher–Ohlin Theory from failing. From the 1980s a new series of statistical tests had been tried. The new tests depended on Vanek's formula.[3] It takes a simple form
The basic Heckscher–Ohlin model depends upon the relative availability of capital and labor differing internationally, but if capital can be freely invested anywhere, competition (for investment) makes relative abundances identical throughout the world. Essentially, free trade in capital provides a single worldwide investment pool.
Unemployment is the vital question in any trade conflict. Heckscher–Ohlin theory excludes unemployment by the very formulation of the model, in which all factors (including labour) are employed in the production.[8]
According to a bibliography published in 1950, Heckscher had, as of the previous year, published 1148 books and articles, among which may be mentioned his study of Mercantilism, which had been translated into several languages, and a monumental Economic history of Sweden in several volumes. Heckscher is best known for a model explaining patterns in international trade (Heckscher-Ohlin model) that he developed with Bertil Ohlin at the Stockholm School of Economics.
Ohlin's name lives on in one of the standard mathematical models of international free trade, the Heckscher–Ohlin model, which he developed together with Eli Heckscher. He was jointly awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences in 1977 together with the British economist James Meade "for their pathbreaking contribution to the theory of international trade and international capital movements".
Standard Heckscher–Ohlin theory assumes the same production function for all countries. This implies that all firms are identical. The theoretical consequence is that there is no room for firms in the H–O model. By contrast, the New Trade Theory emphasizes that firms are heterogeneous.[14][15]
The standard Heckscher–Ohlin model assumes that the production functions are identical for all countries concerned. This means that all countries are in the same level of production and have the same technology, yet this is highly unrealistic. Technological gap between developed and developing countries is the main concern for the development of poor countries. The standard Heckscher–Ohlin model ignores all these vital factors when one wants to consider development of less developed countries in the international context.[12] Even between developed countries, technology differs from industry to industry and firm to firm base. Indeed, this is the very basis of the competition between firms, inside the country and across the country. See the New Trade Theory in this article below.
The Heckscher-Ohlin model (H-O model), also known as the "factors proportions development", is a general equilibrium mathematical model of international trade, developed by Eli Heckscher and Bertil Ohlin at the Stockholm School of Economics. It builds on David Ricardo's theory of comparative advantage by predicting patterns of commerce and production based on the factor endowments of a trading region. The model essentially says that countries will export products that utilize their abundant and cheap factor(s) of production and import products that utilize the countries' scarce factor(s).
The Leontief paradox, presented by Wassily Leontief in 1953, found that the U.S. (the most capital-abundant country in the world by any criterion) exported labor-intensive commodities and imported capital-intensive commodities, contrary to the Heckscher–Ohlin theory.[9]
In the early 1900s, a theory of international trade was developed by two Swedish economists, Eli Heckscher and Bertil Ohlin. This theory has subsequently become known as the Heckscher–Ohlin model (H–O model). The results of the H–O model are that the pattern of international trade is determined by differences in factor endowments. It predicts that countries will export those goods that make intensive use of locally abundant factors and will import goods that make intensive use of factors that are locally scarce.
Ricardian theory is now extended in a general form to include not only labor, but also inputs of materials and intermediate goods. In this sense, it is much more general and plausible than the Heckscher–Ohlin model and escapes the logical problems such as capital as endowments, which is, in reality, produced goods.[17]
In 1930 Ohlin succeeded Eli Heckscher, his teacher, as a professor of economics, at the Stockholm School of Economics. In 1933 Ohlin published a work that made him world-renowned, "Interregional and International Trade". In this Ohlin built an economic theory of international trade from earlier work by Heckscher and his own doctoral thesis. It is now known as the Heckscher–Ohlin model, one of the standard model economists use to debate trade theory.
The critical assumption of the Heckscher–Ohlin model is that the two countries are identical, except for the difference in resource endowments. This also implies that the aggregate preferences are the same. The relative abundance in capital will cause the capital-abundant country to produce the capital-intensive good cheaper than the labor-abundant country and vice versa.