Home > Economia e Política no Mundo, Teoria > Livre Comércio?

Livre Comércio?

18 January, 2010 Leave a comment Go to comments

Em termos econômicos, em que condições o livre comércio é mutuamente benéfico? Muitos diriam “quase sempre”. Entretanto, e em termos teóricos, são várias as condições para que o chamado free trade seja de fato mutuamente atrativo. Dani Rodrik compilou uma lista de condições sob as quais o livre comércio teria impactos positivos nos países liberalizantes. A lista é bem restritiva e mostra que o discurso de apoio incondicional ao free trade não encontra respaldo nem entre os economistas, apesar das defesas apologéticas propagadas por muitos. Confira a lista:

Do blog do Dani Rodrik: Under what conditions will trade liberalization enhance economic performance?

If you answered “under any and all,” you flunk.  Here is the correct answer (adapted from here):

  • The liberalization must be complete or else the reduction in import restrictions must take into account the potentially quite complicated structure of substitutability and complementarity across restricted commodities.
  • There must be no externalities or microeconomic market imperfections other than the trade restrictions in question, or if there are some, the second-best interactions that are entailed must not be adverse.
  • There must not be any increasing returns to scale, or else activities with scale economies must expand “on average.”
  • The home economy must be “small” in world markets, or else the liberalization must not put the economy on the wrong side of the “optimum tariff.”
  • The economy must be in reasonably full employment, or if not, the monetary and fiscal authorities must have effective tools of demand management at their disposal.
  • The income-redistributive effects of the liberalization should not be judged undesirable by society at large, or if they are, there must be compensatory tax-transfer schemes with low enough excess burden.
  • There must be no adverse effects on the fiscal balance, or if there are, there must be alternative and expedient ways of making up for the lost fiscal revenues.
  • The economy must not have a trade deficit that is already “too large,” or else nominal wages or the exchange rate must adjust to compensate.
  • The liberalization must be politically sustainable and hence credible so that economic agents do not fear or anticipate a reversal.

I could expand the list, but you get the point. And all of this is needed just to ensure static benefits. If you want dynamic (growth) benefits, we would have to add an even larger number of other prerequisites. (And just to be absolutely clear, the list above is no argument in favor of trade restrictions either.) The point is that unconditional supporters of free trade take a whole lot for granted. Our professional training prepares us to be analysts who can make contingent statements.  Policy A is good if conditions X, Y, and Z are in place. Rule-of-thumb economists sweep all the caveats under the rug, and in the end, are not true to their training. (I can see the next line of objections coming: Forget theory, some people will say. Look at the real world. Countries that follow open trade policies do so much better than those that don’t.  Well, not so fast actually.

.

  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s